Hi, Since we are updating the min required Java version, shouldn't we move one > step ahead and jump to Java 17. >
Not as long as Oak only requires Java 11, no? +1 for switching to Java 11 +1 for moving to git Best regards, Manfred Am Do., 12. Okt. 2023 um 07:36 Uhr schrieb Rishabh Daim <d...@apache.org>: > Hi > > Since we are updating the min required Java version, shouldn't we move one > step ahead and jump to Java 17. > > This would also help us in staying ahead of the curve and would make it > easy to jump to next LTS i.e. Java 21 in due time. > > +1 for moving to Git. > > Cheers > Rishabh Daim > > On 2023/10/11 17:42:48 Julian Reschke wrote: > > On 11.10.2023 19:29, Konrad Windszus wrote: > > > Hi, > > > In general +1 for requiring Java 11 from the next JR release on. > > > > > > Before doing the actual branching I would love to migrate to Git > though. > > > > Good point - I had that on my TODO list, but forgot about it when I > > wrote the mail. > > > > > That not only eases backporting fixes and switching between branches > but hopefully also encourages external contributions (although we do > already have the GitHub mirror). > > > > Backporting fixes with SVN merge works very well; but that said, I agree > > with the other point. > > > > > It becomes harder nowadays to find good tooling for SVN. > > > WDYT? > > > I am volunteering for doing the actual SVN -> Git migration with the > help of ASF INFRA. > > > Konrad > > > > Awesome. We can do that at any point of time, right? > > > > How about starting a separate mail thread and give people a few days > > before deciding? (you'll have my +1). > > > > Best regards, Julian > > > > >
