On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 16:49, Karl Heinz Marbaise <khmarba...@gmx.de>
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 03.10.19 17:03, Tibor Digana wrote:
> > This is not very serious discussion since we saw users on our
mailing
> > list who said that he is using Java 1.6 compiler and JDK7 in Maven.
>
> Would that change anything? Using JDK 8 for Maven and using JDK 6 for
> compiling/test...
>
>
> > Serious discussion would uncover pros/cons and impact analysis.
> >
> > I would have a problem with Java 1.8 in target and source code but I
> > have problem that we excluded our users from the VOTE.
>
> > Regarding Java 1.7 we clearly uncovered the migration plan,
versions of
> > plugins, core etc. Here nothing like that exists - only that
somebody
> > created a Jira ticket.
>
> Hm...all plugins etc. running on JDK 7+...so in the first step we just
> upgrade the minimum for Maven Core only (3.7.0)... (Apart from having
a
> plugin which is JDK8 minimum already).
>
> Plugins can upgrade to JDK 8 minimum as needed/wished afterwards (may
be
> we could do a version identification...but at the moment I don't see a
> need for that cause they work on JDK7+).
>
Also, to my mind, unless the plugin specifically needs features in Maven
3.7.0 there is added reason for the plugin to stay on JDK7 until it
bumps
the core version of Maven it depends on (or it finds a use-case
requiring
Java 8)
Finally, upgrading to Java 8 is basically a must have for easier TLS
certificate validation as the JDK7 distributions do not all have good
current TLS root certs
> Kind regards
> Karl Heinz Marbaise
>
> >
> > Technically I would be interested if somebody could explain what NEW
> > Security API is in Java 1.8 and performance impact of Streams API.
> > That's the impact in the source code.
> > Somebody has other questions too.
> > Then we can write Wiki as well as rules, conditions and plan.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Tibor17
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 4:55 PM Karl Heinz Marbaise
<khmarba...@gmx.de
> > <mailto:khmarba...@gmx.de>> wrote:
> >
> > On 03.10.19 14:15, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
> > > Strong -1 on Java 8 as the minimum version. Google Cloud
Platform
> has
> > > lots of products and customers that still require Java 7. If
Maven
> > > requires Java 8, we'd have to stick to the latest of
whichever
> > release
> > > does support Java 7 for at least a year and I'm guessing
longer.
> >
> > Hm.. first Java 7 is out for eight years now (2011) (End of
live)
and
> > has no public updates for security/bug fixes etc. since 2015
> >
> > Furthermore Java 8 is out for five years (2014) so to be honest
I
> > wouldn't trust an environment which is not upgrading etc. in
> particular
> > in a clould environment...
> >
> > Why hadn't started Google to update their environment over the
time
> to
> > JDK 8 etc. (I think they have much more resources than anyone).
> >
> >
> > One more thing is:
> > There is a difference between running Maven to build for
example
> > with JDK 8 and running your resulting artifacts (see
toolchain
> > comment
> > from Stephen Connolly..
> >
> > Kind regards
> > Karl Heinz Marbaise
> >
> >
> > [1]:
> >
https://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/java-se-support-roadmap.html
> >
> >
> > >
> > > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 8:04 AM Robert Scholte
> > <rfscho...@apache.org <mailto:rfscho...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> TLDR; introduce maven.experimental.buildconsumer and push
Java
> > requirement
> > >> to Java 8
> > >>
> > >> now that Maven 3.6.2 is out for a couple of weeks, it seems
like
> > we didn't
> > >> face real regressions.
> > >> The only one might be tricky is the issue related to Tycho.
> > >>
> > >> However, I think we're ready to push Maven to the next
level.
> > >>
> > >> For those actively reading this list, they should recognize
the
> > need for
> > >> splitting up the pom as it is on the local system versus the
pom
> > being
> > >> uploaded. Once we truly control this mechanism we can think
of
> > >> improvements on model 5.0.0 and new fileformats.
> > >>
> > >> I've created and implemented MNG-6656[1]. It also contains a
zip
> > with an
> > >> example (original, patched, README) to understand what's
> happening.
> > >>
> > >> In order to make this successful, we need IDEs and CI
Servers
to
> > >> understand and support these changes. The likely need to
> > implement one of
> > >> the interfaces[2].
> > >> The new interface uses Java8 Functions (and especially
> > SAXEventFactory is
> > >> way easier to read+maintain with Java 8). I've tried to keep
> > Maven Java 7
> > >> compatible, but that was too hard to do.
> > >> So I'd like to use this opportunity to move Maven forward
and
> start
> > >> requiring Java 8.
> > >>
> > >> There are some other improvements I'd like to add (those
> > messages will
> > >> follow), so this will imply that it will take some time
before
> > we do a new
> > >> release.
> > >>
> > >> WDTY,
> > >> Robert
> > >>
> > >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6656
> > >> [2]
https://github.com/apache/maven/compare/MNG-6656?expand=1
> > >>
> > >>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
>
>
