The switch will necessarily hurt 3.0 adoption, but I think we’ll live. To me, the benefits (mostly access to lambdas and default methods, tbh) slightly outweigh the downsides.
+0.1 -- AY On May 7, 2015 at 19:22:53, Gary Dusbabek (gdusba...@gmail.com) wrote: +1 On Thu, May 7, 2015 at 11:09 AM, Jonathan Ellis <jbel...@gmail.com> wrote: > We discussed requiring Java 8 previously and decided to remain Java > 7-compatible, but at the time we were planning to release 3.0 before Java 7 > EOL. Now that 8099 and increased emphasis on QA have delayed us past Java > 7 EOL, I think it's worth reopening this discussion. > > If we require 8, then we can use lambdas, LongAdder, StampedLock, Streaming > collections, default methods, etc. Not just in 3.0 but over 3.x for the > next year. > > If we don't, then people can choose whether to deploy on 7 or 8 -- but the > vast majority will deploy on 8 simply because 7 is no longer supported > without a premium contract with Oracle. 8 also has a more advanced G1GC > implementation (see CASSANDRA-7486). > > I think that gaining access to the new features in 8 as we develop 3.x is > worth losing the ability to run on a platform that will have been EOL for a > couple months by the time we release. > > -- > Jonathan Ellis > Project Chair, Apache Cassandra > co-founder, http://www.datastax.com > @spyced >
