Did I object something? :-)

--
Olivier
On 6 Mar 2015 21:19, "Stephen Connolly" <[email protected]>
wrote:

> We are CTR not RTC
>
> If you object to the change, veto the commit
>
> On 6 March 2015 at 07:44, Olivier Lamy <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > +1
> > I just find the change/discussion a bit too fast.
> > You should wait longer than ~10h as the world has more timezone.
> > IMHO waiting for the answer from various members of the community is more
> > like 2/3 days.
> >
> > Cheers
> > --
> > Olivier
> > On 6 Mar 2015 10:37, "Jason van Zyl" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > Ok, the consensus is to move forward to Java7. I updated the POM and
> > we're
> > > in no rush so give it a whirl and we can think about releasing next
> week
> > if
> > > the world doesn't blow up.
> > >
> > > On Mar 5, 2015, at 2:32 PM, Mirko Friedenhagen <
> [email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello there,
> > > >
> > > > I would go for JDK7 as well, in April it will be EOLed anyway. I do
> > > > not understand why someone who is forced to use JDK6 or let alone
> JDK5
> > > > is allowed (or has) to use the newest versions of build tools BTW.
> IMO
> > > > it is stressful enough to support two JDKs (on different at least 3
> > > > OSes).
> > > > Regards Mirko
> > > > --
> > > > http://illegalstateexception.blogspot.com/
> > > > https://github.com/mfriedenhagen/ (http://osrc.dfm.io/mfriedenhagen)
> > > > https://bitbucket.org/mfriedenhagen/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:18 PM, Chris Graham <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >> My preference is to always go for the lowest common denoninator, as
> it
> > > >> gives the largest possible spread.
> > > >>
> > > >> My 'grumbling' as Stephen put it [ :-) ], is more that I'd like
> people
> > > to
> > > >> have an awareness that there are other platforms out there.
> > > >>
> > > >> For example, the current IBM WAS 8.x stack defaults to Java 6, and
> > Java
> > > 7
> > > >> is an extra optional install. I'm not sure if there is an IBM Java 8
> > > >> available (or being used in a product - I'm not sure, I've not
> looked,
> > > and
> > > >> now, I no long can!).
> > > >>
> > > >> Once the core moves the plugins will follow.
> > > >>
> > > >> I don't necessarilly agree with the premise that those stuck on
> older
> > > >> versions of Java will not want to use the newer core/plugins,
> > > especially as
> > > >> backports of fixes are exceptionally uncommon.
> > > >>
> > > >> But if you feel the pressing need to update, feel free.
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 6:11 AM, Karl Heinz Marbaise <
> > [email protected]>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> Hi,
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On 3/5/15 2:16 PM, Igor Fedorenko wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> This is chicken-and-egg situation. We won't use java 7 features
> > unless
> > > >>>> the code targets java 7.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Try-with-resources and multi-exception catch are the too features
> > I'd
> > > >>>> like to start using throughout the code. Although not "critical"
> per
> > > se,
> > > >>>> I think they make writing correct maintainable code noticeably
> > easier.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Improvements to standard library, nio in particular, is another
> big
> > > >>>> reason for me. For example, Files#walkFileTree is significantly
> > faster
> > > >>>> than comparable File-based implementation on large source trees.
> > > Knowing
> > > >>>> the core is on java 7 will allow us use that in plexus-utils for
> > > example.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Hm..plexus-utils is used in many plugins which would cause them to
> > > upgrade
> > > >>> to Java 7 as well ?
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Besides, java 7 is EOL'ed by Oracle next month. Yes, many
> > > organizations
> > > >>>> still use java 6 (and java 5), but the same organizations are not
> > > likely
> > > >>>> to move to use latest maven features any time soon either.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> --
> > > >>>> Regards,
> > > >>>> Igor
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> On 2015-03-05 7:59, Robert Scholte wrote:
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>>> I don't know the numbers, but I think JDK6 is still used a lot by
> > the
> > > >>>>> community.
> > > >>>>> Current code builds fine with JDK6.
> > > >>>>> Which JDK7 specific features do you want to use, which are not
> > > possible
> > > >>>>> with the current codebase?
> > > >>>>> Without any critical codechanges I'd go for -1.
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Robert
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> Op Thu, 05 Mar 2015 13:19:11 +0100 schreef Igor Fedorenko
> > > >>>>> <[email protected]>:
> > > >>>>>
> > > >>>>> With maven core version change to 3.3.0 on master, any
> objections I
> > > >>>>>> change compile source/target to java 7?
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>> --
> > > >>>>>> Regards,
> > > >>>>>> Igor
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>>>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Kind regards
> > > >>> Karl Heinz Marbaise
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > >
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > >
> > > Jason
> > >
> > > ----------------------------------------------------------
> > > Jason van Zyl
> > > Founder, Takari and Apache Maven
> > > http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> > > http://twitter.com/takari_io
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > There's no sense in being precise when you don't even know what you're
> > > talking about.
> > >
> > >  -- John von Neumann
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to