> On Feb 13, 2023, at 7:38 PM, James Gosling <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> So…. In my opinion, JDK8 must die.
+1000, I cringe every time I see one of our VM engineers “back-port” a new
feature!!! GCToolKit is at 11, pinned by users for the moment but I compile and
test with 17 and 20.
> Anyone using Android is in their own special hell, so I tend to not worry
> about them much (mostly spoken as one who has emerged from being connected
> with a project that attempted to work with Android, but OMG…). If it were
> me, I’d skip forward to the latest LTS release, jdk17. I’m living there in
> my current project, and it’s lovely. Especially the GC.
>
> Stop the unholy contortions to coexist. Kill it. Nail its coffin closed.
> Do not look back.
>
>> On Feb 13, 2023, at 5:28 PM, Laszlo Kishalmi <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> What is happening with people in 2023?
>>
>> Attempted bribery (another topic), threatening veto-s and supporters...
>>
>> With all my respect, Jarda, please don't act like this!
>>
>> We are talking and trying to find a solution to a problem:
>>
>> Java 8 is becoming a dead weight on this project.
>>
>> That's a fact, throwing a tantrum over it is not an adult way to handle the
>> situation.
>>
>> Could you elaborate please, how would that affect your world, if for
>> example. NetBeans 20 modules would be compiled with release 11 target?
>>
>> Using lookup and other core modules on Android? Since you are on JDK 8, what
>> would happen if you would stick with your libraries on NetBeans 19? That's
>> certainly possible. Any other use case?
>>
>> Previously you've offered on ideas to separate the language and the target
>> JDK, so the target JDK can be level 8. There were no real use cases other
>> than we can run on Java 8. By now it seems like an obsession.
>>
>> So reason, do not threat! Offer alternatives! The one, so far, it seems was
>> not good enough.
>>
>> Help me understand, that those projects which are stuck on Java 8 for
>> whatever reason, why can't stuck on a specific NetBeans version as well?
>>
>> Help me understand, what's wrong with maintaining a branch for NetBeans
>> which kept on Java 8 and backport necessary stuff from master every now and
>> then. That could be released, auto updated in need?
>>
>> Also, what would be of the scope of this "Java 8 Forever!" movement? The
>> platform (with harness, core) cluster? The ide cluster? All we know, is
>> that the enterprise cluster is a lost cause.
>>
>>
>> I feel, I've lost one of my heroes today...
>>
>> On 2/13/23 11:25, Jaroslav Tulach wrote:
>>> Thank you for your reply Neil.
>>>
>>>>>> I hope everyone recovered from the last JDK 8 thread and is ready for
>>>>>> the first JDK 8 thread of 2023 :)
>>>>> Nobody recovers from these threads with you guys without wounds.
>>>>>
>>>>> -1 (I mean veto) on dropping JDK 8 support.
>>>> If this were a lazy consensus thread, and we're not there yet, I'd
>>>> expect a -1
>>> As you probably know, I am not participating in day-to-day development of
>>> NetBeans. It may happen I miss the vote thread - technically it might be
>>> presented as my mistake, but in reality it would be an obstruction, because
>>> everyone of you shall know:
>>>
>>> I am voting against dropping support for JDK 8.
>>>
>>> At any vote you ever call - even if I miss it. Please be so nice and make
>>> sure
>>> I know that a vote is about to happen. Otherwise I will challenge that vote
>>> at
>>> Apache authorities.
>>>
>>>> to cover a lot more about an alternative way forward,
>>>> addressing the resource issues, testing capacity constraints, peoples'
>>>> time, priorities in supporting JDK 21+, release headaches, etc.
>>> That's what I have been providing to you for the last three years (at
>>> least).
>>> You were never listening to me. Whenever I tried to move NetBeans IDE
>>> forward,
>>> while keeping the wide usability of NetBeans Platform, you said no.
>>>
>>> Well, it is my turn now. I am saying no to "blind" dropping of JDK 8
>>> support.
>>>
>>>> I hope we can find a consensus way forward on all that, but if not we
>>>> end up with a majority vote on the issue.
>>> I certainly hope we find a consensus. That was always the goal behind all my
>>> proposals in the last few years.
>>>
>>> Threatening with a "non-veto" vote on a code issue is a bit nasty, but I can
>>> live with it. Just keep me informed, so I can mobilize supporters.
>>>
>>>> And soon we'll end up with 8, 11, 17, 21 and 22-ea. That does not
>>>> feel sustainable.
>>> Why not? It is a machine doing the testing and it runs "for free". Anyway if
>>> you want to simplify the matrix - then drop 11 or 17 or 21 - they are all
>>> the
>>> same anyway. The the important thing is the bottom and then whether it shall
>>> be JDK8 or not!
>>>
>>> Let the negotiations begin!
>>> -jt
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>>
>>> For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>>
>> For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
> For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
