On Sat, May 24, 2025, 15:34 Elliotte Rusty Harold <elh...@ibiblio.org> wrote:
> On Sat, May 24, 2025 at 1:16 PM Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> > wrote: > > > > ... aaand because some company/ies does/do that, > > we as an open source project/forget need/must stick to it? > > The claim that we must move our JDK version forward because Java > 8/11/17 is not supported is fallacious. It is based on a false > premise. > The claim that we must not move our JDK version forward because Java 8/11/17 is not supported is fallacious. It's based on a false premise. > > If you want to upgrade the minimum Java version, you need a better > reason than that. I haven't yet heard a reason strong enough to > convince me. Others have other opinions. > If you don't want to upgrade the minimum Java version, you don't need to upgrade Maven and stick on Maven 3.9 forever. There are no strong enough reasons to upgrade Java if you want to keep using an older, unsupported, slower, and insecure Java version if you want. > > So basically, all we did so far was "waste of resources" > > as Java 8 is there to stay, at least until 2030, right? > > IMHO, yes. I would much rather people invested their time into fixing > Maven bugs and improving the health of the codebase rather than > continuously migrating code from one Java version to the next. That's > life with a volunteer project though. Developers are going to do what > they find fun rather than delivering user value. -- > 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 > >
