Am 13.08.2016 um 22:29 schrieb Gary Gregory: > I would support another RC that clearly documents what the requirements are > for different parts of the build.
And what would make the big difference to adapted documentation on the side? Gary, I fail to understand your motivation. In the past you stated frequently that our release process is a PITA and you keep repeating the RERO mantra. But now you make the release process even more of a PITA, and you effectively block a release that has been asked for by users multiple times. I think your behavior causes harm to our users and this community as it generates a lot of frustration. Please reconsider your -1 vote. Oliver > > Then IMO we should switch trunk to Java 7. > > Gary > > On Aug 13, 2016 12:37 PM, "Oliver Heger" <oliver.he...@oliver-heger.de> > wrote: > >> >> >> Am 12.08.2016 um 20:11 schrieb Gary Gregory: >>> On Fri, Aug 12, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Dennis Kieselhorst <d...@apache.org> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Am 12.08.2016 um 01:18 schrieb Gary Gregory: >>>>> -1 >>>>> >>>>> From src zip: ASC, MD5, SHA1 OK. >>>>> >>>>> Building with: >>>>> >>>>> Apache Maven 3.0.5 (r01de14724cdef164cd33c7c8c2fe155faf9602da; >>>> 2013-02-19 >>>>> 05:51:28-0800) >>>>> Maven home: E:\Java\apache-maven-3.0.5 >>>>> Java version: *1.6.0_45*, vendor: Sun Microsystems Inc. >>>>> Java home: E:\Program Files\Java\jdk1.6.0_45\jre >>>>> Default locale: en_US, platform encoding: Cp1252 >>>>> OS name: "windows 7", version: "6.1", arch: "amd64", family: "windows" >>>>> >>>> Is it really necessary that the site build is possible with JDK 1.6? >>> >>> >>> For me, keeping it simple is nice. If we say we have different >> requirements >>> for building jars vs. building the site, we are making our lives more >>> difficult IMO. >> >> Okay, I have no interest in fixing the site build on Java 1.6 because I >> do not think it is worth the effort. I belief that not many users will >> build the site, and even less will do this on a JDK 1.6. It may also >> well be the case that it is not possible to come to a solution which >> supports both Java 1.6 and 1.8. >> >> So from my PoV we have the following options regarding this release: >> >> a) Accept the RC as is and ignore this issue. >> >> b) Add a note to the building documentation that the site build requires >> a minimum JDK of 1.7. This is a change of the site and does not require >> another RC. >> >> c) Switch to JDK 1.7 for [configuration]. I do not think that this is a >> good solution because then all Java 6 users are out of the game for no >> good reason. >> >> d) I step back as RM and make room for more capable people. >> >> Please tell me your preference. >> >> Oliver >> >>> >>> Gary >>> >>> >>>> I >>>> checked the history and Oliver updated the findbugs-plugin with comment >>>> "The site build now works with Java 1.8.". Site build with JDK 1.8 works >>>> fine for me. I assume problems problems, if we downgrade it again and >>>> would prefer that it works with latest JDK version. >>>> >>>> Regards >>>> Dennis >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
