+1 (non-binding)
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Dennis Lundberg <denn...@apache.org>wrote: > +1 (binding) > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Stephen Connolly > <stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > > This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven > Core. > > > > Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as > > compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will still > > require to stick to the minimum Java requirements of that Maven Core > > version. In other words, if for example maven-compiler-plugin advertises > > compatibility with Maven Core 2.0.11+ then that will still need to be > > compiled targeting Java 1.4 and only using dependencies that are aligned > > with that runtime requirement. > > > > Additionally patch releases to existing releases of Maven Core will not > be > > subject to this requirement. > > > > For example [example]*if* this vote passes and *if* on Sep 29th we > release > > Maven 3.2.0 and *if* on Oct 2nd we release Maven 2.0.12, Maven 2.2.2, > Maven > > 3.0.6, Maven 3.1.1, Maven 3.2.1 and Maven 3.3.0 (due to say some security > > issue that affected all versions of Maven) then only Maven 3.3.0 would be > > require Java 6 as a minimum runtime requirement, the 2.0.12 release would > > still require Java 1.4 and the 2.2.2, 3.0.6, 3.1.1 and 3.2.1 versions > would > > all still require Java 1.5.[/example] > > > > This is not a requirement that 3rd party plugins need use Java 6 as a > > minimum. Third party plugins are free to require any Java version >= the > > corresponding Maven minimum requirement, though obviously from a users > > perspective it is best if plugins try to adhere to our contracts for > > corresponding versions of Maven Core. > > > > Justification for the cut-off date: > > > > * Oracle has gone end of life on Java 6 Feb 2013 (note that there is > still > > extended and sustaining support for existing Oracle customers using Java > 5) > > * IBM will go end of life for z/OS on 30th Sep 2013 (other platforms are > > still with support, but there are other Java vendors for other platforms) > > * Apple no longer supports any hardware that does not have at least an > > Apple Java 6 version available. > > * Red Hat is providing support for OpenJDK 6 > > * HP-UX, OpenVMS, and Tru64 all have a Java 6 implementation available. > > > > As I see it, that essentially ensures that for the vast majority of > > platforms there is a very strong likelihood of a Java 6 compatible > version > > of Java available for that platform. Toolchains support or forking of the > > compiler and surefire can provide support for users who still need to > build > > with older versions of Java (e.g., as was the case for Java 1.4.2 with > > Maven 2.2.1). Additionally users who are forced to use a java version > older > > than Java 6 also are likely unable to upgrade their version of Maven, so > > this change will not affect them > > > > This vote is open for 72 hours. A minimum of three +1 binding votes (i.e. > > from the PMC) and the majority of votes cast from committers will be > > required to pass this vote. > > > > +1000: Yes, and when can we have the vote to go for Java 7 as a minimum? > > (This option is equivalent to +1 but provides people the ability to > > indicate an additional preference while not contributing to the > inevitible > > noise) > > +1: Yes > > 0: No opinion > > -1: No > > > > -Stephen > > > > -- > Dennis Lundberg > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
