Re: [QUESTION/DISCUSSION] Does our required Java version need updating?

Kay Schenk wrote: ​For some reason, given Oliver's desire and urging to change to Java 7 in Windows back in August of 2013, I was under the impression that since that time, at least the Windows version was built with Java 1.7. ​ I've re-read the discussion at

Re: [QUESTION/DISCUSSION] Does our required Java version need updating?

On 12/19/2015 01:46 PM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > Kay Schenk wrote: >> ​For some reason, given Oliver's desire and urging to change to >> Java 7 in >> Windows back in August of 2013, I was under the impression that >> since that >> time, at least the Windows version was built with Java 1.7. ​ >

Re: [QUESTION/DISCUSSION] Does our required Java version need updating?

Having recently looked at our Java UNO binding, it occurred to me that another advantage of Java 7 would be that we could update our Java UNO base classes to implement AutoCloseable, allowing try-with-resources to be used to manage UNO reference counting precisely and delete unused objects as soon

Re: [QUESTION/DISCUSSION] Does our required Java version need updating?

On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 11:56 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > On 17/11/2015 Kay Schenk wrote: > >> On 11/17/2015 02:17 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: >> >>> Java 6 went out of update status quite some time ago -- Feb. 2013 -- >>> and this is still being used for our Linux builds, and

Re: [QUESTION/DISCUSSION] Does our required Java version need updating?

On 17/11/2015 Kay Schenk wrote: On 11/17/2015 02:17 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: Java 6 went out of update status quite some time ago -- Feb. 2013 -- and this is still being used for our Linux builds, and Windows builds if our current binaries are produced with the same configuration as the buildbot

Re: [QUESTION/DISCUSSION] Does our required Java version need updating?

Hi, > OK, it's been a few weeks now and I'd like to get back to this. > Are there any objections to using Java 8 instead of the combination > of Java 6 and 7 that we have now? sorry for late reply, OS/2 build is using java 1.6 and this is the most recent JRE available. thanks, -- Bye,

Re: [QUESTION/DISCUSSION] Does our required Java version need updating?

On 11/19/2015 04:01 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: > > > On 11/17/2015 11:50 PM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: >> Building AOO with Java 8's very strict javadoc tool was fixed in SVN trunk >> only, by r1697228, r1697237, r1697247, r1697306, and r1697312, so yes it >> should work well for building AOO now, and

Re: [QUESTION/DISCUSSION] Does our required Java version need updating?

On 11/19/2015 08:47 PM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 2:01 AM, Kay Schenk wrote: On 11/17/2015 11:50 PM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: Building AOO with Java 8's very strict javadoc tool was fixed in SVN trunk only, by r1697228, r1697237, r1697247,

Using Maven (was RE: [QUESTION/DISCUSSION] Does our required Java version need updating?)

> -Original Message- > From: Carl Marcum [mailto:cmar...@apache.org] > Sent: Sunday, November 29, 2015 06:40 > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org > Subject: Re: [QUESTION/DISCUSSION] Does our required Java version need > updating? > [ ... ] > Don't forget Maven i

Re: [QUESTION/DISCUSSION] Does our required Java version need updating?

On 11/17/2015 11:50 PM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: > Building AOO with Java 8's very strict javadoc tool was fixed in SVN trunk > only, by r1697228, r1697237, r1697247, r1697306, and r1697312, so yes it > should work well for building AOO now, and it's the only version I've been > testing for

Re: [QUESTION/DISCUSSION] Does our required Java version need updating?

On Fri, Nov 20, 2015 at 2:01 AM, Kay Schenk wrote: > > > On 11/17/2015 11:50 PM, Damjan Jovanovic wrote: > > Building AOO with Java 8's very strict javadoc tool was fixed in SVN > trunk > > only, by r1697228, r1697237, r1697247, r1697306, and r1697312, so yes it > > should

Re: [QUESTION/DISCUSSION] Does our required Java version need updating?

On 11/17/2015 02:17 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: > We seem to have a number of numer of Java related discussions of > late. Here's another one -- the Java version we're using for builds. > > Java 6 went out of update status quite some time ago -- Feb. 2013 -- > and this is still being used for our

Re: [QUESTION/DISCUSSION] Does our required Java version need updating?

Am 11/17/2015 11:39 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: On 11/17/2015 02:17 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: We seem to have a number of numer of Java related discussions of late. Here's another one -- the Java version we're using for builds. Java 6 went out of update status quite some time ago -- Feb. 2013 -- and

Re: [QUESTION/DISCUSSION] Does our required Java version need updating?

Am 11/17/2015 11:39 PM, schrieb Kay Schenk: > > > On 11/17/2015 02:17 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: >> We seem to have a number of numer of Java related discussions of >> late. Here's another one -- the Java version we're using for builds. >> >> Java 6 went out of update status quite some time ago -- Feb.

Re: [QUESTION/DISCUSSION] Does our required Java version need updating?

Building AOO with Java 8's very strict javadoc tool was fixed in SVN trunk only, by r1697228, r1697237, r1697247, r1697306, and r1697312, so yes it should work well for building AOO now, and it's the only version I've been testing for months on FreeBSD. Base works, wizards work, beanshell scripts