I feel we should base 3.0 on Java 11 and later go to 17, then 21, these all being Java LTS versions.
>From what I see at work and in the wild, the move from Java 8 to 11 was a big deal. Sure, we are looking at 17 at work for the future but there is no big rush because on some of the OSs/customers we deal with, going to Java 17 requires an OS upgrade, which is a huge ask. So, one LTS at a time IMO. Gary On Mon, Jun 5, 2023, 12:33 Matt Sicker <m...@musigma.org> wrote: > Piotr raised an interesting question recently which deserves a dedicated > thread here: what should our strategy be for supporting various versions of > Java? Our current strategy is essentially Java 8 for 2.x and Java 11 for > 3.x, but with projects like Spring pushing Java 17 as a base requirement > and Java 21 (the latest LTS release) coming out in September, we may want > to devise a version support strategy. > > As for relevant features in newer releases, we can rely on multi-version > jars to support specific APIs, but even some of the more relevant ones like > scoped values and string templates are still in preview mode as of version > 21.
