The real question is should we change Maven coordinates and package name? I've barely started on JDBC 4.2 and it does not seem required yet.
3.0.0 somewhat implies API breakage which has not happened yet so 2.5.0 is better for now IMO... Gary On Sun, Jun 17, 2018, 04:40 Claude Warren <cla...@xenei.com> wrote: > If we look at java version numbering as 1.x then the argument could be made > that each java minor version is really a new version in the semantic > numbering scheme. With this in mind then the version number for DBCP > should jump when the java version jumps. > > I would argue that the java 8 version should be 3.0.0 but would agree that > 2.5.0 might be appropriate. I guess the questions are: > > When the versions of the software the library is dependent upon have major > version changes should the library itself have major version number > changes? > Is a change in java version a major version change to a library this > library is dependent upon? > > Claude > > > On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 9:41 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Hello Mark and all, > > > > Thank you for the heads up on the Tomcat plans. > > > > Asking DBCP to stay on Java 7 for 4-5 years is insane IMO, and it > certainly > > is not going to attract anyone to maintain and grow this component (IMO > > again.) If that is a set of handcuffs you want to live with, then by all > > means ;-) > > > > I am sure there is nothing stopping anyone at Apache to keep patches > coming > > to the DBCP 2.4.x line. I plan on keeping the release train going for > many > > Commons component, so I am happy to release DBCP at will. > > > > You will notice that > > https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-dbcp/download_dbcp.cgi > presents > > no less than tree different versions of DBCP for different antique Java > > platforms. We are just going to make that list one deeper. > > > > Again, patches are more than welcome. And do feel free to call for a RC > or > > RM it yourself ;-) > > > > Gary > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 2:34 PM Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > On 16/06/18 21:14, Matt Sicker wrote: > > > > On 16 June 2018 at 14:11, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > >> What is driving the desire to move to Java 8? > > > >> > > > > > > > > What's driving the desire to maintain support for a seven year old > > > release > > > > of Java which is not supported without paying large sums of money to > > > > Oracle? > > > > > > As I said, Tomcat 8 which has at least another 4 to 5 years of life in > > > it, depends on DBCP 2 and has a specification mandated requirement to > > > maintain compatibility with Java 7. > > > > > > There are ways the Tomcat community could work around this. Because > Java > > > 7 is EOL does not - on its own - strike me as a sufficiently good > reason > > > to create hassle for another ASF community. > > > > > > If there are new features in Java 8 we want to take advantage of or an > > > update to the JDBC API that we want to support then fair enough. Those > > > are good reasons but I'd like to see them explicitly articulated. > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > I like: Like Like - The likeliest place on the web > <http://like-like.xenei.com> > LinkedIn: http://www.linkedin.com/in/claudewarren >
