This sounds a lot like what was discussed back when components went through Java 6 -> 7 and later Java 7 -> 8 upgrades. So far, we’ve only made Java requirement updates in the minor version, not the patch version, and as Gary is saying, we wouldn’t bump the major version without renaming the entire API/ABI as usual, and that’s typically reserved for compatibility-breaking changes.
On the other hand, since multi-release jars are a thing, we could theoretically target Java 8 and others at the same time. Various tooling has historically been buggy around multi-release jars (anything scanning for .class files in /META-INF is already incorrect before considering multi-release jars), so that’s something to also consider. > On Oct 15, 2023, at 3:36 PM, Elliotte Rusty Harold <elh...@ibiblio.org> wrote: > > There's no rule that you have to change the package name and Maven > coordinates with a major version bump. As long as the API is > compatible, it's OK to keep those. But breaking compatibility with > Java 8 is a pretty big step forward. > > The goal is to allow people to produce and accept bug fixes in > libraries without being forced to upgrade to a JDK version they might > not actually need, or even be actively prohibited from using. JDK 8 > --> 9+ is a huge shift, much bigger than 7 --> 8, that breaks a lot of > projects in unexpected ways. > > On Sun, Oct 15, 2023 at 2:32 PM Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> A major version bump is rather heavy handed when no one is asking for a >> "real" 2.0 with breaking changes. A major bump would imply a package name >> and Maven coordinate change. At least that's what we have done before for >> major version changes. We've also done major version changes without those >> types of changes BUT it would be nice to be consistent. For example, to >> update to Java 11 for Commons Lang without a package name change would mean >> calling it 4.0 while the package stays as lang3, confusing. >> >> Gary >> >> On Sun, Oct 15, 2023, 9:17 AM Elliotte Rusty Harold <elh...@ibiblio.org> >> wrote: >> >>> Not a library I use so I don't have a horse in the race. However, I do >>> recommend making this a major version bump to 2.0 so as not to close >>> off the possibility of critical fixes for folks still on older JDKs. >>> >>> On Sun, Oct 15, 2023 at 8:42 AM Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> We've recently released DBUtils after a long period of inactivity. Java >>> 21 >>>> is also out. I plan on raising the floor for this component to Java 11 >>> and >>>> GitHub builds will keep testing on Java LTS 11, 17, 21. I've not seen any >>>> Java 21 issues yet. >>>> >>>> Gary >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Elliotte Rusty Harold >>> elh...@ibiblio.org >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>> >>> > > > > -- > Elliotte Rusty Harold > elh...@ibiblio.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
