>> any previous jdk is not maintained Romain I was not talking about yes/no J8. I was talking about J8 sources. Not about dead J7 and Oracle support of J7.
Not sure if the Maven devs would be able to use J8. Important is "how". Therefore the Wiki should help them "how". >> We can still get fixes releases on need backporting small fixes. Not for sure. You was not in the Maven when we said that we wouldnt backport to the old 3.x versions because it went with high cost and we do not have enough human resources. On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 9:08 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: > Le jeu. 3 oct. 2019 à 20:22, Tibor Digana <tibordig...@apache.org> a > écrit : > > > The topic related to TLS is only related to runtime, means JDK, which is > > under the control of the particular user or CI. > > I guess the user can easily find the answer: > > > > > https://stackoverflow.com/questions/50824789/why-am-i-getting-received-fatal-alert-protocol-version-or-peer-not-authentic > > > > The thing is that we need to specify: > > + advantages of Java 1.8 in code (Lambda, brief code, maybe) > > + disadvantages of Java 1.8 in code (Streams performance when/how/what > > approach???) > > > > There is also a not technical view, any previous jdk is not maintained so > its support is no more needed since we are far from any acceptable > migration for projects which would migrate. > > > > > Write notices for developers on the internal Wiki: > > + toolchains > > + limitations and solutions for disadvantages > > + conditions when and how to migrate from J7 to J8 > > > > > Or the most common option: stick to current mvn version. > > We can still get fixes releases on need backporting small fixes. It is how > asf works after all. > > I wouldnt bother users with toolchain, it is only needed for libs and the > active ones almost all migrated to j8 ;). > > > > and then we should Vote for J8. > > > > And there are users who is has J6 and J7 and they may require us to > > maintain the old version 3.6.x. > > What to do in this case? > > Is the toolchain enough? Usually it is in ordinal projects! > > > > Cheers > > T > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 5:52 PM Stephen Connolly < > > stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 16:49, Karl Heinz Marbaise <khmarba...@gmx.de> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > On 03.10.19 17:03, Tibor Digana wrote: > > > > > This is not very serious discussion since we saw users on our > mailing > > > > > list who said that he is using Java 1.6 compiler and JDK7 in Maven. > > > > > > > > Would that change anything? Using JDK 8 for Maven and using JDK 6 for > > > > compiling/test... > > > > > > > > > > > > > Serious discussion would uncover pros/cons and impact analysis. > > > > > > > > > > I would have a problem with Java 1.8 in target and source code but > I > > > > > have problem that we excluded our users from the VOTE. > > > > > > > > > Regarding Java 1.7 we clearly uncovered the migration plan, > versions > > of > > > > > plugins, core etc. Here nothing like that exists - only that > somebody > > > > > created a Jira ticket. > > > > > > > > Hm...all plugins etc. running on JDK 7+...so in the first step we > just > > > > upgrade the minimum for Maven Core only (3.7.0)... (Apart from > having a > > > > plugin which is JDK8 minimum already). > > > > > > > > Plugins can upgrade to JDK 8 minimum as needed/wished afterwards (may > > be > > > > we could do a version identification...but at the moment I don't see > a > > > > need for that cause they work on JDK7+). > > > > > > > > > > Also, to my mind, unless the plugin specifically needs features in > Maven > > > 3.7.0 there is added reason for the plugin to stay on JDK7 until it > bumps > > > the core version of Maven it depends on (or it finds a use-case > requiring > > > Java 8) > > > > > > Finally, upgrading to Java 8 is basically a must have for easier TLS > > > certificate validation as the JDK7 distributions do not all have good > > > current TLS root certs > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards > > > > Karl Heinz Marbaise > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Technically I would be interested if somebody could explain what > NEW > > > > > Security API is in Java 1.8 and performance impact of Streams API. > > > > > That's the impact in the source code. > > > > > Somebody has other questions too. > > > > > Then we can write Wiki as well as rules, conditions and plan. > > > > > > > > > > Cheers > > > > > Tibor17 > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 4:55 PM Karl Heinz Marbaise < > > khmarba...@gmx.de > > > > > <mailto:khmarba...@gmx.de>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On 03.10.19 14:15, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote: > > > > > > Strong -1 on Java 8 as the minimum version. Google Cloud > > > Platform > > > > has > > > > > > lots of products and customers that still require Java 7. If > > > Maven > > > > > > requires Java 8, we'd have to stick to the latest of > whichever > > > > > release > > > > > > does support Java 7 for at least a year and I'm guessing > > longer. > > > > > > > > > > Hm.. first Java 7 is out for eight years now (2011) (End of > live) > > > and > > > > > has no public updates for security/bug fixes etc. since 2015 > > > > > > > > > > Furthermore Java 8 is out for five years (2014) so to be > honest I > > > > > wouldn't trust an environment which is not upgrading etc. in > > > > particular > > > > > in a clould environment... > > > > > > > > > > Why hadn't started Google to update their environment over the > > time > > > > to > > > > > JDK 8 etc. (I think they have much more resources than anyone). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > One more thing is: > > > > > There is a difference between running Maven to build for > > example > > > > > with JDK 8 and running your resulting artifacts (see > toolchain > > > > > comment > > > > > from Stephen Connolly.. > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards > > > > > Karl Heinz Marbaise > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1]: > > > > > > > > https://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/java-se-support-roadmap.html > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 8:04 AM Robert Scholte > > > > > <rfscho...@apache.org <mailto:rfscho...@apache.org>> wrote: > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Hi, > > > > > >> > > > > > >> TLDR; introduce maven.experimental.buildconsumer and push > > Java > > > > > requirement > > > > > >> to Java 8 > > > > > >> > > > > > >> now that Maven 3.6.2 is out for a couple of weeks, it seems > > > like > > > > > we didn't > > > > > >> face real regressions. > > > > > >> The only one might be tricky is the issue related to Tycho. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> However, I think we're ready to push Maven to the next > level. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> For those actively reading this list, they should recognize > > the > > > > > need for > > > > > >> splitting up the pom as it is on the local system versus > the > > > pom > > > > > being > > > > > >> uploaded. Once we truly control this mechanism we can think > > of > > > > > >> improvements on model 5.0.0 and new fileformats. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> I've created and implemented MNG-6656[1]. It also contains > a > > > zip > > > > > with an > > > > > >> example (original, patched, README) to understand what's > > > > happening. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> In order to make this successful, we need IDEs and CI > Servers > > > to > > > > > >> understand and support these changes. The likely need to > > > > > implement one of > > > > > >> the interfaces[2]. > > > > > >> The new interface uses Java8 Functions (and especially > > > > > SAXEventFactory is > > > > > >> way easier to read+maintain with Java 8). I've tried to > keep > > > > > Maven Java 7 > > > > > >> compatible, but that was too hard to do. > > > > > >> So I'd like to use this opportunity to move Maven forward > and > > > > start > > > > > >> requiring Java 8. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> There are some other improvements I'd like to add (those > > > > > messages will > > > > > >> follow), so this will imply that it will take some time > > before > > > > > we do a new > > > > > >> release. > > > > > >> > > > > > >> WDTY, > > > > > >> Robert > > > > > >> > > > > > >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6656 > > > > > >> [2] > > https://github.com/apache/maven/compare/MNG-6656?expand=1 > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
