I have no issues if we want to call the next version 4.0.x rather than 3.4.x
In my view there are some advantages to using the 4.0.x version number as a Java 8 bump... namely that leaves the modelVersion 5.0 changes to Maven 5.0 And let's face it, it will just be less confusing to users to say "To build a modelVersion 5.0 pom you need Maven 5" So if there is strong interest in jumping to Java 8 perhaps we just bite the bullet and jump to Maven 4.0 with Java 8 now and then we can start the model version 5.0 debate in earnest as we plan the features for Maven 5.0 ;-) -Stephen On 30 November 2015 at 22:25, Jason van Zyl <[email protected]> wrote: > I agree that jumping to Java 8 would be unwise. I think we can wait until > 4.x. Don’t get me wrong, I’d prefer to use Java 8 and I do for almost > everything else but I don’t think there’s any dire rush. > > > On Nov 30, 2015, at 2:00 PM, Michael Osipov <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Am 2015-11-30 um 22:18 schrieb Stephen Connolly: > >> Picking up from > >> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/maven-dev/201511.mbox/%3CCA%2BnPnMyjogmqRweYbxLuULLB9ve2P6MPcQuH%2BPkxcNn-oN4GPg%40mail.gmail.com%3E > >> (and my follow up to that but archive.apache.org is being a tad slow) > >> > >> Here is our policy: > >> > >> The development line of Maven core should require a minimum JRE version > >>> that is no older than 18 months after the end of Oracle's public > updates > >>> for that JRE version at the time that the first version of the > development > >>> line was released, but may require a higher minimum JRE version if > other > >>> requirements dictate a higher JRE version > >> > >> > >> (Source: > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Version+number+policy > ) > >> > >> OK, so it's a draft policy... but we've all been silent on the draft, so > >> lazy consensus! > >> > >> Now in http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/eol-135779.html > they > >> state: > >> > >> after April 2015, Oracle will not post further updates of Java SE 7 to > its > >>> public download sites > >> > >> > >> So per our (draft) version number policy, we can keep Java 7 as the > >> baseline :-( or we can choose to upgrade code to Java 8 (because we > want to > >> use lambdas... there's a requirement) > >> > >> > >> So assuming we bump the master branch of Maven core to 3.4.0, what Java > >> version do we want to use as the baseline? > >> > >> There are thankfully only two options: > >> > >> Java 7 > >> + Not actually changing things > >> + May make it easier to drive adoption > >> - Still can't use newer language features in core > >> - Java 7 is EOL and it may get harder for developers to source JDKs to > >> test and develop against > > > > Bumping Java requirements again in minor (!) release is insane. I am > against that, regardless Oracle has set this EoL or not. Folks at Commons > are doing the right this. Bump requirement with a major not a minor. > Moreover, we have too many components which have been neglected for years, > too many outstanding issues in JIRA. E.g., Doxia, I try to fix some once in > a while but there a too few of us to take care of the entire Maven > ecosystem. > > > > I would rather see us to bringing the entire system on a decent level > before we make a big leaps which Java. It does not make sense to be to put > Maven on the fast lane but let other components suffer at the edge of the > road. > > > > Michael > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > 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 > --------------------------------------------------------- > > Be not afraid of growing slowly, be only afraid of standing still. > > -- Chinese Proverb > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >
