True,
although I think it makes sense to fix the javadoc stuff anyways to not require that setting On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 6:41 PM, Hiram Chirino <[email protected]> wrote: > I would not recommend exerting too much effort in maintaining Java 7 > support since Java 7 is EOL. The only type of lib I would say should > keep old Java support for is client libs. There are some platforms > out there that don't rev that quickly (stuff like GWT, Android, etc). > Would it makes sense to keep clients libs in builds outside of > Artemis? > > On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 5:57 PM, Clebert Suconic > <[email protected]> wrote: >> The first try was using profiles but it was kind of messy. This was >> done very closely to the releases and I didn't have time to evaluate >> any other options back then. >> >> If all we need is to fix javadoc, I would say we fix javadoc and >> remove the java8 dependency (at least for now). I'm not sure yet how >> difficult that would be though >> >> >> >> On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 5:45 PM, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> Do you mean the -Xdoclint:none option? Javadoc is stricter with Java8 >>> and will refuse to process things that 'worked' with Java7. You can >>> make it lenient again using the -Xdoclint config option, but that only >>> works when using Java8 and so setting it then makes javadoc processing >>> fail when building on Java7 since it doesnt understand the new config >>> option. >>> >>> When I first hit this elsewhere I just updated all the javadoc to >>> remove the errors seen using Java8, allowing things to work on 7 or 8 >>> without disabling doclint. You could possibly use profiles to apply >>> the config selectively. >>> >>> Robbie >>> >>> On 8 June 2015 at 22:23, Clebert Suconic <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> The only thing I remember we had to add JDK 1.8 to the equation was >>>> some option we needed for building javadocs. Perhaps there is a better >>>> way to solve that. >>>> >>>> Right now the codebase is not using anything specific to JDK 1.8. (I >>>> mean.. at least that's the idea. we could have slipped something.. but >>>> I don't recall anything specific to java8 in the codebase) >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jun 8, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> I’ve updated a bunch of things so that Artemis now loads fairly easily >>>>> into Eclipse without any errors for all the non-example things. I >>>>> haven’t attempted the examples yet. >>>>> >>>>> Just have a couple of questions: >>>>> >>>>> 1) In the poms, we specify that Java8 is required to build, but java7 is >>>>> used for the source/target. Thus, Eclipse will pick up the Java7 >>>>> runtime. It seems to work OK so I’m kind of wondering why we require >>>>> Java8 to build. Maybe in the examples someplace? >>>>> >>>>> 2) artemis-dto has a profile for jdk-1.5. I assume that is not needed >>>>> at all as there is no way it would ever be triggered. I think the >>>>> ibmjdk profile in there is irrelevant as well? (seems to reference things >>>>> about differences between 1.5 and 1.6) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Daniel Kulp >>>>> [email protected] - http://dankulp.com/blog >>>>> Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Clebert Suconic >>>> http://community.jboss.org/people/[email protected] >>>> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com >> >> >> >> -- >> Clebert Suconic >> http://community.jboss.org/people/[email protected] >> http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com > > > > -- > Hiram Chirino > Engineering | Red Hat, Inc. > [email protected] | fusesource.com | redhat.com > skype: hiramchirino | twitter: @hiramchirino -- Clebert Suconic http://community.jboss.org/people/[email protected] http://clebertsuconic.blogspot.com
