oracle?

> Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 13:54:43 -0700
> Subject: Re: Requiring Java 1.7 for Mahout
> From: [email protected]
> To: [email protected]
> 
> or testing.
> 
> 
> On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Dmitriy Lyubimov <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > My current java is 1.6.0_38, i have no problem building.
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Andrew Palumbo <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> you're right- my big concern is that on our (probably outdated) building
> >> from source page we have 1.6 listed:
> >>
> >> http://mahout.apache.org/developers/buildingmahout.html
> >>
> >> The obvious simple fix here is to make the quick change on the webpage to
> >> 1.7 in order to build and test successfully.
> >>
> >> I do remember something about being limited to our current lucene version
> >> though by 1.6 so i am wondering if this is may be a good time to push or
> >> require 1.7.
> >>
> >> Just checking our bases, so I'll drop it if there's no problem here.
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> > Date: Wed, 6 Aug 2014 13:33:19 -0700
> >> > Subject: Re: Requiring Java 1.7 for Mahout
> >> > From: [email protected]
> >> > To: [email protected]
> >> >
> >> > the only problem is that we are not really requiring it. We are not
> >> using
> >> > anything of 1.7 functionality. If people compile (as i do) Mahout, they
> >> can
> >> > compile any bytecode version they want.
> >> >
> >> > There are some 1.7 artifact dependencies in H20 but 1.7 would be
> >> required
> >> > at run time only and only if the people are actually using h2obindings
> >> as
> >> > dependency (which i expect majority would not care for).
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 1:28 PM, Andrew Palumbo <[email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > As far as I can tell there should be no problems with declaring Java
> >> 1.7
> >> > > as the official minimum Java version for building and running Mahout.
> >>  Are
> >> > > there any objections to this or problems that I am missing?
> >> > >
> >> > > Andy
> >> > >
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
                                          

Reply via email to