Hey All. Regarding the discussions around upgrading to a minimum of Java 1.6.
Whilst I understand the desire for developers to play with something shiny and new, I do find that the current 1.5 based Maven is more than sufficient for our needs. I lot of responses about the upgrade are normally around the "just upgrade the java" (assuming that I am running under tomcat of similar [if only it was so simple as that!]). I am running Maven inside of Jenkins inside of WebSphere on AIX. I am currently hosting Jenkins under WAS 6.1 on AIX 5.3. Whilst AIX 5.3 is nearing (or may have reached it's EOS), WAS 6.1's EOS dates have *just been extended* by a year! Additionally, although the Sun/Oracle Java 1.5 may have been EOS'd quite a while ago, the IBM Java 1.5/5 is most definately not EOS. Please see: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/java/jdk/lifecycle/index.html. Running on AIX, we have one choice in JDK: IBM. The IBM 1.5/5 EOS is Sept 2015! The reality is that we have lots of WebSphere servers running in large data centres. So simply stating "just upgrade java" (assuming that it is running under Tomcat or similar) is simply not an option for us. Whilst I do realise that very (1.5% by your [Jenkins] figures {I suspect that maven figures are similar]) few of us still run on 1.5, some of us will simply not be able to upgrade to a newer version of WAS/JDK as a simple task. It's not as easy as clicking your fingers. I also do wonder how many installations are in said data centres and are unable to report their presence. So I do believe that the 1.5% figure would be low, but certainly within an order of magnitude. So, please do not cut us off from future updates. Thanks, -Chris On Thu, Feb 7, 2013 at 12:05 PM, Manfred Moser <manf...@mosabuam.com> wrote: > Totally agree... if people really need to build for older Java runtimes > they still can.. but if Oracle thinks they dont want to support JDK < 1.7 > without getting paid why would the Maven project do it ;-) > > For now 1.6 seems just fine and I would even say a jump to 1.7 in the next > year or three (;-)) would be reasonable.. > > manfred > > > +1, bump to JDK6 minimum for Maven. > > > > > > 2013/2/6 Stephen Connolly <stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> > > > >> I think we should at least have a minor version bump on core to > >> co-incide... Though I think calling it maven 4.0 might be better (that > >> way > >> we catch up with the model version ;-) > >> > >> On Wednesday, 6 February 2013, Olivier Lamy wrote: > >> > >> > Hi, > >> > As we are now in 2013, it's probably time to think about that (again). > >> > > >> > Reading [1], even 1.6 won't be anymore updated after feb 2013. > >> > > >> > Can we say we are safe to go to 1.6 as minimum required ? > >> > > >> > NOTE: That will probably need a vote. So depending on how the thread > >> > move, I will start a vote (or not). > >> > > >> > Thanks > >> > -- > >> > Olivier Lamy > >> > Talend: http://coders.talend.com > >> > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > >> > > >> > [1] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html > >> > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > >> <javascript:;> > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: > >> dev-h...@maven.apache.org<javascript:;> > >> > > >> > > >> > >> -- > >> Baptiste <Batmat> MATHUS - http://batmat.net > >> Sauvez un arbre, > >> Mangez un castor ! nbsp;! > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
