Good question! :D

On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 2:34 PM Delany <delany.middle...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Excuse my ignorance but what do customer requirements have to do with the
> build tool's required JDK?
> Delany
>
>
> On Wed, 31 May 2023 at 13:57, Elliotte Rusty Harold <elh...@ibiblio.org>
> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, May 31, 2023 at 8:30 AM Guillaume Nodet <gno...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > I think with those improvements, requiring JDK 17 for master should be
> > > doable.  Any concerns of suggestions ?
> >
> > Hard no from me. JDK 8 is still very much in use, and is my day-to-day
> > VM. I switch to 11 when I have to, and I don't anticipate switching to
> > 17 for years unless I decide to write another book.
> >
> > When I left Google and GCP about a year ago, we still had customer
> > requirements for quite old versions. From the public docs it looks
> > like they still support Java 8 and sometimes Java 7.
> >
> > I know of multiple companies where the migration to Java 11 is still
> > in progress. Some companies are also sticking to Java 8 for likely the
> > remainder of my career. JPMS in Java 9 caused a lot of problems for
> > weakly supported libraries and many devs can't or won't upgrade past
> > Java 8 for that reason.
> >
> > Slow and steady wins the race. Java 8 is a perfectly fine VM, and
> > Maven really doesn't need anything more right now. I think we'll get
> > to Java 11 eventually. but that's still a few years down the road and
> > there's a lot of cleanup work to be done first. Just today I sent a PR
> > to replace some utility methods we haven't needed since Java *1.4*.
> > When there's some improvement we really can't make without updating to
> > Java 11 is when we should consider switching. So far I don't see any
> > critical need for it though.
> >
> > --
> > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > elh...@ibiblio.org
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
> >
> >
>

Reply via email to