We have abandoned support for very outdated platforms that almost nobody uses in production anymore, especially not those who still develop the Java applications running there. So I don't think that should come with a bigger version number change. (The issue with _Java9.class, and _Java16.class is of course a separate issue, and it's kind of a bug. Too bad nobody ran into this in the recent months.)
On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 9:30 AM Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote: > > Hi, > Thanks for the quick response. > Of course incrementing the version number > TBH I was surprised to read the release notes containing " increased > from Java 7 to Java 8. Also for the few who rely on Servlet and/or JSP > support, the minimum is now increased to Servlet 3.0, and JSP 2.2" > and only a minor increment in the release number. > > On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 at 17:10, Daniel Dekany <daniel.dek...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Java 8 is the minimum. But if some popular tools scan the inside of > > the jar to find the sole Java 16 class in it, then I guess we will > > have to improve the packaging like you said. That will require a new > > release with incremented version number though. > > > > On Mon, Jun 3, 2024 at 5:50 AM Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > Hi, > > > Last release of freemarker [1] mentions " the minimum required Java > > > version was increased from Java 7 to Java 8" but Maven enforcer rule > > > fail with max byte code 1.8. > > > > > > Try this simple pom [2] with mvn validate and this will show the problem. > > > > > > would it be possible to package the java16 using > > > https://openjdk.org/jeps/238 ? > > > > > > Thanks. > > > Olivier > > > [1] https://freemarker.apache.org/docs/versions_2_3_33.html > > > [2] https://gist.github.com/olamy/aeeb0abd3ec41ee0496fa640ce38af5e > > > > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > > Daniel Dekany -- Best regards, Daniel Dekany
