I am not suggesting that all the bundles in the whole Eclipse top-level project should have the same target. Target decisions are made at the level of logical components and most of the components are composed of multiple bundles. Within a component, specifying different targets at bundle-level mostly just causes confusion without increasing flexibility, since individual bundles within a component are unlikely to be used separately (the definition of a component).
- Konstantin From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Daniel Megert Sent: Wednesday, September 04, 2013 12:54 AM To: Cross project issues Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Has Java 5 Platform support been discontinued? > The decisions on what targets to support are rarely made on bundle-by-bundle basis because a single bundle does not represent a meaningful usecase. It really does pay to go through all the bundles and update the requirements when a decision is made to change > these for a broader component. SWT for example can easily be used stand-alone and it's just wrong to force every client to use JRE 6 just because the Eclipse IDE as a whole requires it. Increasing the BREE for low-level bundles can affect many people/projects as you can well see in Luna, where Equinox increased to 'JavaSE-1.6' (see <https://bugs.eclipse.org/416432> bug 416432 for discussion). Another counterexample is JDT which has bundles that require JRE 7. If we would take your approach, we would switch the BREE for all (at least JDT) bundles to 'JavaSE-1.7'. Dani From: "Konstantin Komissarchik" <[email protected]> To: "'Cross project issues'" <[email protected]> Date: 03.09.2013 18:45 Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Has Java 5 Platform support been discontinued? Sent by: [email protected] _____ And this is exactly why a granular approach to supported targets is a bad idea. While it does offer some more flexibility in certain situations, it causes massive confusion as to what's supported overall. The decisions on what targets to support are rarely made on bundle-by-bundle basis because a single bundle does not represent a meaningful usecase. It really does pay to go through all the bundles and update the requirements when a decision is made to change these for a broader component. - Konstantin From: [email protected] [ <mailto:[email protected]> mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ed Willink Sent: Tuesday, September 03, 2013 9:35 AM To: Cross project issues Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Has Java 5 Platform support been discontinued? Hi I must be very dense. Where does it say "The platform requires Java 6". Regards Ed Willink On 03/09/2013 17:19, John Arthorne wrote: I can't think of any way to be clearer than I already have. The platform requires Java 6, and it has required Java 6 for several years. Next time I do a plan update I will try to make that even clearer. John From: Ed Willink <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]> To: Cross project issues <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]>, Date: 09/03/2013 10:47 AM Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Has Java 5 Platform support been discontinued? Sent by: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] _____ Hi I'm sorry John but you are dodging the issue. There is far too much this is what we do, and very little of this is what we require. Most of the Eclipse SDK is "pure" Java code and has no direct dependence on the underlying operating system. The chief dependence is therefore on the Java Platform itself. Portions are targeted to specific classes of operating environments, requiring their source code to only reference facilities available in particular class libraries (e.g. J2ME Foundation 1.1, J2SE 1.4, Java 5, etc). In general, the 4.3 release of the Eclipse Project is developed on a mix of Java SE 6 and Java SE 7 VMs. As such, the Eclipse SDK as a whole is targeted at all modern, desktop Java VMs. Most functionality is available for Java SE 6 level development everywhere, and extended development capabilities are made available on the VMs that support them. Yes there have been a few bundles that needed 1.6 for some time, but it seems like the critical parts of the platform have been 1.5. The list on <http://www.eclipse.org/projects/project-plan.php?projectid=eclipse#appendix > http://www.eclipse.org/projects/project-plan.php?projectid=eclipse#appendix still shows very little that needs 1.6, so I see no statement that the platform needs 1.6. I delivered my Indigo, Juno and Kepler releases as Java 5 minimum requirement. Clearly the platform and many projects were highly Java 5 tolerant. There should perhaps be a separate overall statement at the top that 1.6 is the minimum requirement (although some bundles may be more tolerant). Or org.eclipse.core.* needs to change to 1.6 Regards Ed Willink On 03/09/2013 14:57, John Arthorne wrote: I seem to have a knack for definitive statements lately so I'll take a try at this. The last Eclipse Platform release to officially support Java 5 was 3.6/Helios. We have not run our tests against Java 5 for several years and can make no claim that it works. Since Platform 3.8 it has certainly been impossible to run the complete platform using Java 5 due to Jetty dependency on Java 6 (and possibly other bundles). Oracle Java end of life was in 2009 (in fact Oracle Java 6 is also past end of life now). Some individual bundles may still support older runtimes but at this point they are the exception rather than the norm. The list of bundle EE levels is updated with each plan revision, but as long as they are within the scope of the current list of reference platforms they are not generally announced individually. John From: Ed Willink <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]> To: Cross project issues <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]>, Date: 09/03/2013 09:24 AM Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Has Java 5 Platform support been discontinued? Sent by: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] _____ Hi I am doing my best to continue support for existing functionality, so in the absence of a clear Eclipse statement that Java 5 support is terminated, I feel I have to continue to keep close to 5. Guava changing to Java 6 was awkward. OSGI changing to Java 6 is very close to a mandatory downstream consequence. Can we please have a clear policy statement rather than a secretive creep. I don't mind changing to Java 6, it probably makes life easier. But I hate this are we 5 or 6 limbo? Regards Ed Willink On 03/09/2013 13:51, David M Williams wrote: I probably should have mentioned, there are several bugs we are still trying to work through, where the Tycho/Maven build picks a different "compiler level" than the way PDE used to it ... and not always in the way we intend, for example, <https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=415116> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=415116 <https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=411419> https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=411419 I am not sure if this is related to the issue you are seeing ... or if merely confirms yet another "unannounced change" ... but I don't think it changes the bottom line: If you want things different than they are, open a bug or comment on an existing one. If it is merely a matter that you don't really care, but you have to change your test scripts, then all I can say is "sorry". From: Ed Willink <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]> To: Cross project issues <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]>, Date: 09/03/2013 08:34 AM Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Has Java 5 Platform support been discontinued? Sent by: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] _____ Hi Szymon Your list omits the 'culprit'. It is org.eclipse.osgi.util.NLS that is now Java 6 putting paid to all attempts at internationalization with Java 5. Regards Ed Willink On 02/09/2013 16:41, Szymon Ptaszkiewicz wrote: > See > <http://www.eclipse.org/projects/project-plan.php?projectid=eclipse#appendix > http://www.eclipse.org/projects/project-plan.php?projectid=eclipse#appendix > for the table of minimum EE per bundle. > > Szymon > > > > > From: David M Williams <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]> > To: Cross project issues <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]> > Date: 2013-09-02 17:34 > Subject: Re: [cross-project-issues-dev] Has Java 5 Platform support > been discontinued? > Sent by: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] > > > >> So it seems that the Platform no longer supports Java 5. > Yes and no. As a whole, such for whole Eclipse SDK, even Kepler (If not > Juno) said "Java 6 required", although there were always some bundles (and > combination of bundles) that supported lower VMs. > >> Is this intentional and an unannounced policy change? > Probably not announced well. It has been discussed at status meetings, and > various bugzillas, that some previous "1.4" or "1.5" bundles were moving to > "1.5" or "1.6", but I am not sure there is yet a comprehensive list of > those that have. (Other than looking in the manifests themselves). > > I think it's been assumed "no one cares about Java 1.5 any longer" ... so, > if anyone does (i.e. you have requirements or customers with requirements > for 1.5), then I suggest you open a bug on the specific use-case you need > to support on 1.5 and what bundle changes prevent that. I'm sure the > committers for those components would be willing to re-consider if it > impacts adopters. > > But, the default assumption for testing should be "1.6" ... would be my > personal advice. > > HTH > > > > > > From: Ed Willink <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]> > To: Cross project issues <mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]>, > Date: 09/02/2013 11:02 AM > Subject: [cross-project-issues-dev] Has Java 5 Platform support been > discontinued? > Sent by: <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] > > > > Hi > > Using a recent (post M1) platform I-build some of my unit tests now fail > with a NoClassDef found for Platform. > > Changing the launch configuration to force JVM 6 and the tests run fine. > > So it seems that the Platform no longer supports Java 5. > > Is this intentional and an unannounced policy change? > > Regards > > Ed Willink > _______________________________________________ > cross-project-issues-dev mailing list > <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] > <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev > > _______________________________________________ > cross-project-issues-dev mailing list > <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] > <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > cross-project-issues-dev mailing list > <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] > <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev > > > ----- > No virus found in this message. > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com > Version: 2013.0.3392 / Virus Database: 3222/6630 - Release Date: 09/02/13 > > _______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev _______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> Version: 2013.0.3392 / Virus Database: 3222/6633 - Release Date: 09/03/13 _______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev _______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> Version: 2013.0.3392 / Virus Database: 3222/6633 - Release Date: 09/03/13 _______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev _______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev No virus found in this message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com <http://www.avg.com/> Version: 2013.0.3392 / Virus Database: 3222/6633 - Release Date: 09/03/13 _______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list [email protected] <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
_______________________________________________ cross-project-issues-dev mailing list [email protected] https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/cross-project-issues-dev
