The non problems: - members building project with ancient java versions and calling -1 on release votes (as turns out,by mistake) - javadoc inconsistencies: what is allowed and what not - being stuck in a 20 year tech stack ...
Again, _build time requirement_ has nothing to do with _runtime requirement_. Or in other words, a bit of rephrasing: For example, desktop app devs who develop apps "certified to work on older OS-es (than current)" _develop those apps on "lower end" of supported OSes version_? So, if a macOS app CAN work on macOS 12 (current is 14), it MUST be developed on macOS 12? On Sat, Feb 3, 2024, 16:25 Michael Osipov <micha...@apache.org> wrote: > Am 2024-02-03 um 15:16 schrieb Martin Desruisseaux: > > Hello > > > > From the replies in this thread, it seems to me that there is a > > consensus for moving Maven 4 to some Java version after 8. I see: > > > > * 0 in favour of Java 11 > > * 1.5 in favour of Java 17 (the .5 is because I split a vote between > > Java 17 and 21) > > * 2.5 in favour of Java 21 > > * 4 seem neutral (including myself) > > > > Do we take that as an agreement to require Java 21 for building Maven 4? > > > > On a related question, what should be the minimal Java version for > > *running* Maven 4? Keeping in mind that if Java 21 (for example) was > > required, users would still be able to compile for an older Java version > > using the --release option. > > I still don't understand what non-problem you are trying to solve here?! > I think that your time and our time would be better invested in solving > real problems, just look into JIRA how many issues have piled up. > > M > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >
