We need to be clear about whether this is about building on a particular JDK or running on a particular JDK.
Also, I think before we discuss moving away from JDK 8 altogether, we need to be 100% sure that the support for the later JDKs is really perfect, i.e., that it really and actually completely works. Gj On Sun, Aug 19, 2018 at 9:15 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, 19 Aug 2018 15:07:38 -0400 > "William L. Thomson Jr." <[email protected]> wrote: > > > This came up on PR-572 > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/572 > > Since the PR is locked I cannot comment. The ONLY reason such change > breaks is the Travis-CI build is run under 1.8 ONLY[1]. It seems other > JDKs available under Travis are being ignored[2]. Such that if NB build > on Travis used JDK 11 it would fail as well... It may also fail with > JDK 9 or JDK 10. Not sure why Travis builds do not test under those > newer JDKs and only builds using Java 8. > > JDK 11 release is next month. JDK 10 is current. If there was a JDK 10 > job on Travis. That PR fix would likely have passed. Given it is a > valid change under JDK 10, as well as 11. > > Its this holding onto legacy Java 8. We want more contributions to > support an arch the contributor will never use or run. My interest is > in current JDK and newer, not older. I submit changes for newer. But > they are held back, because such changes MUST support older than newer. > > Is Netbeans forward or backward minded? > > 1. https://travis-ci.org/apache/incubator-netbeans/jobs/387221179/config > 2. https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/languages/java/#using-java-10-and-later > > > -- > William L. Thomson Jr. >
