[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3239?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13054621#comment-13054621
]
DM Smith commented on LUCENE-3239:
----------------------------------
Hey, it's me, old-stick-in-the-mud, wrt upgrading Java :) For the most part, I
think the same arguments as last time (Java 1.4 -> Java 5) still apply.
However, Oracle is so much more aggressive in obsoleting their software. They
haven't patched Java 5 in quite some time. When Lucene went to Java 5, Java 1.4
was still being patched.
I think most will be running Lucene under Java 6 (excepting some versions of
Mac OS X and hardware. E.g. Core Duo Macs can't run Java 6).
I'd like to see that we have api compatibility w/ Java 5 (i.e. it can compile
against Java 5), but certify against Java 6. This would allow it to run under
Java 5, with the appropriate caveats that it is not supported or tested.
If you do go to Java 6 features, then I think it has to be a 4.0 release and
the planned 4.0 might need to be bumped to a 5.0 designation.
> drop java 5 "support"
> ---------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-3239
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-3239
> Project: Lucene - Java
> Issue Type: Task
> Reporter: Robert Muir
>
> its been discussed here and there, but I think we need to drop java 5
> "support", for these reasons:
> * its totally untested by any continual build process. Testing java5 only
> when there is a release candidate ready is not enough. If we are to claim
> "support" then we need a hudson actually running the tests with java 5.
> * its now unmaintained, so bugs have to either be hacked around, tests
> disabled, warnings placed, but some things simply cannot be fixed... we
> cannot actually "support" something that is no longer maintained: we do find
> JRE bugs (http://wiki.apache.org/lucene-java/SunJavaBugs) and its important
> that bugs actually get fixed: cannot do everything with hacks.
> * because of its limitations, we do things like allow 20% slower grouping
> speed. I find it hard to believe we are sacrificing performance for this.
> So, in summary: because we don't test it at all, because its buggy and
> unmaintained, and because we are sacrificing performance, I think we need to
> cutover the build system for the next release to require java 6.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
