Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-jmeter-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-jmeter-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4557ECE98 for ; Sun, 16 Nov 2014 02:45:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 43360 invoked by uid 500); 16 Nov 2014 02:45:39 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-jmeter-dev-archive@jmeter.apache.org Received: (qmail 43324 invoked by uid 500); 16 Nov 2014 02:45:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@jmeter.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@jmeter.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@jmeter.apache.org Received: (qmail 43312 invoked by uid 99); 16 Nov 2014 02:45:38 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 16 Nov 2014 02:45:38 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of sebbaz@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.181 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.212.181] (HELO mail-wi0-f181.google.com) (209.85.212.181) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 16 Nov 2014 02:45:34 +0000 Received: by mail-wi0-f181.google.com with SMTP id n3so5985010wiv.14 for ; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 18:44:28 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=mlwLUMn7qyh/ZeANuXgJgftLmji6YP0ELBZ/MjPji04=; b=M+LXOno46y8D5iTr6SENN25P5l2uCqTgZsZR61GwldhoWV0mBhQFTpU3XRcX17WkwF 4xWBk8/2zVQGvRABVOvEu8fzaKyYl2YsBmovgt7/jStwL0EUva0CpqAwFUflchPa3Hr0 73rQg/RAP7pfYohRiyNM6DZvJaMdJf1/WGDvI3v99hCpHiB69b7ywEyhojmCpVH1KlOk anfK6Va2HD091RIgrkZw17yu2QHSFrjW7oMmSkAlVxNvMwCVDs4UUEGpR/uttKd0BK2G zI5mjlhO1zY0XRPWhP7pybhPPmK1Fb5cVP5rxZEcVm5Y4mga84GmssnlHBH8W/ds3D5D +UWA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.194.238.133 with SMTP id vk5mr14502184wjc.18.1416105868489; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 18:44:28 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.194.138.101 with HTTP; Sat, 15 Nov 2014 18:44:28 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <5467D284.7010802@apache.org> References: <54679B03.6070609@apache.org> <5467D284.7010802@apache.org> Date: Sun, 16 Nov 2014 02:44:28 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Drop Java 6 support for the next release? From: sebb To: dev@jmeter.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 15 November 2014 22:24, Milamber wrote: > > On 15/11/2014 19:00, sebb wrote: >> On 15 November 2014 18:27, Milamber wrote: >>> Hello, >>> >>> I would open the discussion to remove the Java 6 support (End Of Life: >>> Feb 2013) to JMeter for next release (in 2015 I think). >>> >>> I think, now, the Java 7 (or 8) is widespread on computer. >>> >>> For history: >>> JMeter 2.9 (2013-01-28) drop the Java 1.5 support (EOL Oct 2009) >>> JMeter 2.4 (2010-07-12) drop the Java 1.4 support (EOL Oct 2008) >>> >>> Note : Java 7 EOL is April 2015 >>> >>> >>> Have you some special objections to remove the Java 6 support to JMeter? >>> >> JMeter is an a stand-alone application, and so other Java code is not >> generally dependent on it. >> >> This means we have more freedom when deciding the minimum Java version. >> If necessary, JMeter can be installed on a separate system with a more >> recent version of Java. >> >> I think the main constraint is whether or not the Java version is >> readily available and stable on a wide variety of platforms. >> >> Having said that, unless a newer version of Java offers significant >> benefits, there is no point in forcing (some) users to upgrade Java. >> >> So: what are the features of Java 7 and/or 8 that would improve JMeter? > > I'm not sure that is the good question. It is the main question we should ask ourselves. > Why Apache JMeter must support the EOL Java versions ? and (second > question) why JMeter must work on a non-supported version of Java by > editor ? I'm not saying it must work on EOL versions of Java. Remember that Java applications are upwards compatible, so we are not stopping it from being used with Java 7,8,9 etc. However, we should not arbitrarily require Java 7 just because Java 6 is EOL. > For example, the bug 54477 is only fixed by using the Java 7 version. We > can't fix this bug with Oracle (Sun) because the EOL arrived... That is exactly the sort of information that I meant. > I'm made a lot of load testing mission, and I have always the > possibility to install the latest Java version. JMeter isn't a server > process like httpd, the compliant with old version isn't mandatory for > the run test, the load tester (person who make the load test or > functional test) can always impose their requirements (i.e. Java version). > > If I follow your logical think, the question is: when the JMeter minimal > Java version must be change? Why wait 4 years to upgrade to Java 5? or 2 > years to upgrade to Java 1.4? what is the criteria to upgrade the Java > runtime at this time (2009 / 2008)? > > Please, give us the reasons to keep the reason to keep JMeter compliant > with no-support of the Java version by the editor (and the security > issues, bug issue with old version)? I am not saying we have to keep JMeter compliant with Java 6. However I am saying that we should not break compliance merely because Java 6 is EOL. It looks like there are some good reasons for requiring Java 7. I'm not so sure that there are good reasons for requiring Java 8. > Milamber > > > > > >> >>> Milamber >>> >>> >>> [ Oracle Java SE Support Roadmap] >>> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html >>> >