On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 10:38 AM, Svata Dedic <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi, > > we / you should also consider, before dropping JDK8 as a runtime platform, > that applications that build ON TOP of NetBeans platform may have a way > conservative requirements than developers who strive to use the bleeding > technology edge. > > The changes made in JDK9 (the module system, reflection restrictions etc) > are so disruptive that dropping JDK8 from platform (+ java) clusters may > disqualify NetBeans as an application platform of choice. > As I understand it, the Powers That Be plan on anointing some versions of Java as "Long Term Support", with the others being some kind of interim Java. The next version to offer LTS is, apparently, Java 11. The current LTS version is Java 8. If you want to hook NB to a particular Java version, an LTS version would be the best choice (IMHO). As mentioned above, when NB starts to require a specific Java Version, implicitly the NB PLATFORM will have the same requirements, and that "all of a sudden" has impact on projects outside of NB proper. NB should certainly support BUILDING projects on the latest and greatest Java versions, but that's different from the runtime requirements of NB itself. It would be NICE if NB CAN run on the latest Java Version, but, IMHO, it's not worth breaking changes if an older Java Binary does not run on a current Java that is not LTS. Since the LTS versions are supposed to be 3 years apart, that gives NB breathing room. Trying to keep up with Java versions arriving every 6mos to a year is just crazy make work, time which this team does not have. Finally, the "well folks running old stuff can run old versions" only goes so far. For an internet that has infinite memory, it's pretty amazing how truly fragmented the Java world is. The destruction of java.net certainly didn't help, but even Maven doesn't have older artifacts any more. There's a lot of legacy (and not even THAT legacy, 5 years..) code that simply can not be built any more as they relied on the distributed build model of maven with the false promise that The Internet would keep things around forever. When netbeans.org dies, is Apache going to host NB 6, 7, or 8 artifacts (much less the earlier artifacts)? So, it's important (I think) that a notion of backward compatibility is given some measure of priority, since folks do rely on these projects for their work. If the perception is update early, update often, and keep up to date. Forcing users to stay on the wavefront of change, then in some circles the popularity of the platform will drop. "keeping up" takes time and effort from everyone. Time folks might rather put in to enhancing their projects or fixing their own bugs instead of time taken to just keep along with the projects they use. "NB just dropped an update, there's goes 2 sprints of work to catch back up". Regards, Will Hartung
