Hi, On 19.07.22 19:10, Tamás Cservenák wrote:
Actually, yes, I keep forgetting about release flag: so, if running on LTS, user can do: - use compiler "release" flag to target any Java from 8 to 17 (up to current LTS it runs on)
You can build for target JDK 7 with JDK17 via --release ... and also not ONLY on LTS release of JDK you can use also non LTS versions for that... Kind regards Karl Heinz Marbaise
- use toolchains to target any other Java (older or "specific") T On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 7:03 PM Karl Heinz Marbaise <khmarba...@gmx.de <mailto:khmarba...@gmx.de>> wrote: Hi, On 19.07.22 18:48, Tamás Cservenák wrote: > @Anders I'd stop using the "run on for what you build for" aspect. We will > have to split it IMHO. It caused a lot of luggage for us in the past (we > still release Java 7 plugins in 2022). > > Instead, I think we need to simplify toolchains for users, and make it > clear for them that for their benefit (but also ours), they should use the > latest LTS whatever they target for. Running the latest LTS has way too > many benefits for us as for users (faster, less resource, better errors > [reported to us] and so on). Workstations are usually fully up to date > (latest OS, latest Java, latest Maven), so we will somehow have to "trick" > (persuade) users to stop what they did before (if they targeted some legacy > system running on Java7): they installed Java7 and run Maven using it, and > do it differently. Just like IDEs, they clearly separate "runtime" Java > (they usually "bring their own") and "target" Java, and the two are two > completely separate things. > > Now, all this above is "just me" (my personal opinion). After all, we may > consider making toolchains "less pain" (as you say "it adds complexity"), > so maybe some integration with macOS libexec/java_home, sdkman, jenv, > etc... (unsure what or how yet, am just throwing out ideas). I'm on MacOS ... no it simply works using --release... Much easier than toolchains. Kind regards Karl Heinz Marbaise > > T > > On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 6:34 PM Anders Hammar <and...@hammar.net <mailto:and...@hammar.net>> wrote: > >> I'd say Java 11 if there isn't some very good feature in Java 17 that we >> need. So far we have supported the current and prior Java LTS version and I >> think that's a good aim. Lot's of users are still on Java 11 and even if >> you can execute Maven with a different Java version than you build for, it >> does add some complexity. >> But, if we don't release it until Sept 2023 I think Java 17 is fine (as >> Java 23 should be out). :-) >> >> On Tue, Jul 19, 2022 at 6:24 PM Karl Heinz Marbaise <khmarba...@gmx.de <mailto:khmarba...@gmx.de>> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi to all, >>> >>> what do you think about using JDK17 as minimum requirement for running >>> the future Apache Maven 4.0.0 ? >>> >>> Kind regards >>> Karl Heinz Marbaise >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org <mailto:dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org <mailto:dev-h...@maven.apache.org> >>> >>>
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
