On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 5:17 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>
wrote:

> Did you look at any of the links in my email?  Java 10 will be released in
> March. When that happens Java 9 will be unsupported for everyone. You
> cannot purchase support for it or get security updates. It is dead.


I seriously doubt that Oracle will turn down a pile of cash when some
Fortune 500 company asks for maintenance on some random Java 7/8/9/10/11
version. For what's available for free OTOH, all bests are off indeed.


> The same thing will happen with Java 10 in September when Java 11 is
> released.  So having a policy that we will only ever choose an LTS version
> as our minimum supported version makes sense to me.  We can even predict
> when we will do that if we want.
>

If we want to say that in the future, we plan on only supporting LTS
releases, sure, we can say that now, but what's the point? We are so far
from that it seems. We could say that that's what we'd like to do as
something sensible and not leading to a trip to the loony bin. But it seems
like future tripping since we are thinking on staying on Java 8 for a
while.

Gary


> That isn’t to say we cannot support Java 10+ features. The multi-release
> jar was introduced to explicitly allow us to do that, although I agree it
> is unfortunate that it was done in a way that causes so much grief.
>
> Ralph
>
> > On Feb 13, 2018, at 5:10 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 5:04 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> While I agree with your statements regarding Java 7 and 8 I can’t think
> of
> >> why we would ever want to have Java 9 or 10 be the minimum supported
> >> version. Would you be comfortable saying that knowing that those
> versions
> >> aren’t supported by Oracle in any way for anyone?
> >>
> >
> > Pardon my brain fog but I am not sure what you mean by "Would you be
> > comfortable saying that knowing that those versions aren’t supported by
> > Oracle in any way for anyone?"
> >
> > WRT Java 9, I am very disappointed by the mess that Java multi-release
> jars
> > are causing in tool chains and Java modules feel like OSGi NIH. I would
> be
> > happy to sit on Java 8 for a while.
> >
> > Gary
> >
> >
> >> Ralph
> >>
> >>> On Feb 13, 2018, at 3:26 PM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 9:44 PM, Ralph Goers <
> ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
> >>>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I found this update that says Oracle has extended the public support
> of
> >>>> Java 8 about 4 months past the release of Java 11.
> >>>> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/02/Java8SupportJan18 <
> >>>> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/02/Java8SupportJan18>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I do not think we need to create ourselves a set of handcuffs here. I
> >> could
> >>> see a "Roadmap" page that states that the next version will be 2.11.0
> and
> >>> that will be Java 7 and that we imagine 2.x staying on Java 7. Next
> will
> >> be
> >>> 3.0.0 which will be Java 8. Anything beyond that is speculation.
> >>>
> >>> Gary
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Ralph
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Feb 12, 2018, at 5:28 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com
> >
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> There is an article at InfoQ that discusses Oracle’s support strategy
> >>>> [1]. It contains a chart that shows the support lifetime for all
> Oracle
> >>>> releases. [2] It references a blog post from Azul discussing Oracle’s
> >>>> support strategy. [3] These charts are confirmed by Oracle’s roadmap.
> >> [4].
> >>>> The end of public updates for Java 7 was in April 2015 and the end of
> >>>> premier support is July 2019. [5]
> >>>>>
> >>>>> First, based on this and the decline in the interest in Java 7 and
> that
> >>>> we are now about 3 years past the last public updates I am fine with
> >> making
> >>>> Java 8 our minimum version along with the release of Log4j 3.0. FWIW,
> >> while
> >>>> SLF4J still supports Java 5, as of today Logback 1.3.0 now requires a
> >>>> minimum of Java 8.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> After that things start to get strange. I think we will have to take
> >>>> advantage of the multi-release jar support more and more in the future
> >>>> because I don’t see how we could ever make Java 9 or 10 the minimum
> >>>> supported version since Oracle will effectively drop support for them
> 6
> >>>> months after they are introduced. I would think we would have to wait
> >> until
> >>>> Java 8 usage declines to the levels Java 7 currently is before
> upgrading
> >>>> and at that time we would have to skip all the way to Java 11.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Whatever we decide to do I would prefer if we could publish our JVM
> >>>> support strategy on the web site.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ralph
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1. https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18 <
> >>>> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18>
> >>>>> 2. https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/
> >>>> resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-
> 1517328730133.jpg
> >> <
> >>>> https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/
> >>>> resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-
> >> 1517328730133.jpg>
> >>>>> 3. https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/ <
> >>>> https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/>
> >>>>> 4. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html <
> >>>> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html>
> >>>>> 5. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/eol-
> >>>> 135779.html#java-commercial-offerings <http://www.oracle.com/
> >>>> technetwork/java/javase/eol-135779.html#java-commercial-offerings>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>

Reply via email to