All, Most of my clients still work with Java EE 6 (on Java SE 7), so I think it is too early to abandon that version.
+1 for setting compile version to SE 7. Regards Rudy On 25 March 2016 at 13:48, Gerhard Petracek <gpetra...@apache.org> wrote: > hi @ all, > > imo the benefit is too limited. > cdi 1.1 added some nice parts, but mainly for users. > we would just drop the bv-module as well as some parts of the servlet > module. > the jsf-module already contains optional ee7 support (-> we would just get > rid of one small workaround). > for the rest the benefit is minimal as well (or there won't be a change at > all). > ee7 is great for users and therefore we support it already, however, > internally the benefit is too limited and ee6 servers will be around the > next few years. > > -> imo v2 should be based on cdi 2.0 (-> ee8). > > regards, > gerhard > > > > 2016-03-25 13:29 GMT+01:00 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>: > > > Se 8 is surely too early (~1 year I think). +1 to drop ee6 from master. > > Le 25 mars 2016 13:27, "Harald Wellmann" <hwellmann...@gmail.com> a > écrit > > : > > > > > Since John raised the question about Java SE 6 support, what about Java > > EE > > > 6? > > > > > > Dropping support for Java EE 6/CDI 1.0 would simplify the code base > > > significantly (a lot more so than moving from Java 1.6 to Java 1.7). > > > > > > How about starting a new release line DeltaSpike 2.x targeting Java EE > 7+ > > > and Java SE 8+, with continued support for Java EE 6 on the 1.x branch > > for > > > as long as people are willing to work on backward compatibility? > > > > > > Regards, > > > Harald > > > > > >
