@Hervé: was not really my point, more than forcing the maven version as plugins do also forces the java version so as soon as we decide for maven plugins are good. They can be compiled with java 8 and run on maven 3+4 while API is stable or just maven 4 if not. For external plugins some are already compiled with java 11 only so will not run on java 8 builds even if 3.9 supports it so think this part is really good technically - agree with you in terms of doc we can be better but requires a lot of time and effort as you mentionned.
Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> Le mar. 6 juin 2023 à 09:11, Hervé Boutemy <herve.bout...@free.fr> a écrit : > you're right that we're currently talking about core, not plugins > > but this question will inevitably extend from core to plugins, and there > are > much more plugin developers than core developers > > then I think that getting a large view is useful > > and honestly, now that I had the opportunity to do the summary and find > dist- > tool + DOCCK-38 improvements, I know how to continue to prepare the future > of > this JDK prerequisite question on plugins > > I'll just need that people interested in upgrading JDK prerequisite help > doing > the hard documentation work required to make that move in a smooth way = > avoid > the "I only care about users who can use latest JDK" effect > > Regards, > > Hervé > > Le mardi 6 juin 2023, 08:29:16 CEST Romain Manni-Bucau a écrit : > > Do we really care about plugins Hervé? They are compatible with some > maven > > versions so cover the underlying prerequisites, no? > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog > > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github < > https://github.com/rmannibucau> > > | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book > > < > https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance > > > > > Le mar. 6 juin 2023 à 08:27, Hervé Boutemy <herve.bout...@free.fr> a > écrit : > > > > > notice that this will also impact all plugins: and given the few > work > > > > > > done > > > > > > > > on > > > > > plugins to clearly show what plugin version remains compatible > with a > > > > > > JDK > > > > > > > > release, I feel we're not taking the topic the right way > > > > > > > > Can you detail it please? While we keep plugin-api java 8 compat - > which > > > > > > is > > > > > > > not under discussion there - there is no more impact than today > > > > normally. > > > > > > currently, if you are still using JDK 7 or even earlier (not a shame, > just > > > a necessity), it's easy to select latest compatible Maven release: > > > https://maven.apache.org/docs/history.html > > > > > > What about using latest compatible plugins? > > > It's where finding documentation starts to become hard: > > > > > > - each plugin has it public documentation showing only the latest JDK > > > prerequisite > > > > > > - our consolidated view itself is just known from experts only: > > > > > > > https://ci-maven.apache.org/job/Maven/job/maven-box/job/maven-dist-tool/jo > > > b/master/site/dist-tool-prerequisites.html > > > > > > > > > we added some time ago "System Requirements History" for that purpose = > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MPLUGIN-400 > > > for example, once a plugin has documented its history, you get: > > > > > > > https://maven.apache.org/maven-release/maven-release-plugin/plugin-info.ht > > > ml#system-requirements > > > > > > Every plugin should document its system requirements history > > > = we need to organise the work to make sure it's done in our own > plugins: > > > I did the job on a few ones, but it has to be generalised and I don't > see > > > anybody interested in doing the work (and I'm tired of doing myself the > > > documentation cleanup on many aspects...) > > > > > > notice: now that I wrote that summary, I see we can: > > > 1. add a check in dist-tool prerequisites report, to have a clear > global > > > view > > > 2. add a check in DOCCK Maven Documentation Checker Plugin: it did not > > > have any release for years, this will be a good reason to update it > > > https://maven.apache.org/plugins/maven-docck-plugin/index.html > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MDOCCK-38 created > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Hervé > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
