Re: [ANNOUNCE] Apache Buildr 1.4.25 released

2016-05-01 Thread Alex Boisvert
Thanks Antoine!  Happy to see you hacking on Buildr again.

On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 10:30 PM, Antoine Toulme 
wrote:

> Apache Buildr is a build system for Java-based applications, including
> support
> for Scala, Groovy and a growing number of JVM languages and tools.  We
> wanted
> something that's simple and intuitive to use, so we only need to tell it
> what
> to do, and it takes care of the rest.  But also something we can easily
> extend
> for those one-off tasks, with a language that's a joy to use.
>
>
> New in this release:
>
>   * Change: BUILDR-712 Update jruby-openssl dependency version or support
> a range of versions
>   * Change: Update gwt addon to add the GWT artifacts to project
> dependencies as specs rather
> than files.
>   * Change: Support the project.root_project utility method to retrieve
> the top level project.
>
>
> To learn more about Buildr and get started:
> http://buildr.apache.org/
>
> Thanks!
> The Apache Buildr Team


Re: [DISCUSS] Scala support

2016-05-01 Thread Alex Boisvert
On Sat, Apr 30, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Antoine Toulme 
wrote:

> Does it make sense to move to 2.11.8, or should we move to the latest 2.12
> milestone? I would like to shoot for the latter.
>

Nobody is using 2.12 yet; so I think we should move to 2.11.x.


> We are still using JDK7 for now but need to think of moving to JDK8 soon.
>
> With version 1.5, we can make the jump.
>

Version 1.5 should support 2.10, 2.11 and 2.12.   (And support for 2.12
will require JDK 8, but we should still support 2.10 and 2.11 with JDK 7).

Agree with can drop support for JDK6.

Do we have motivation to target only JDK 8?   If so, what is it?


Re: [DISCUSS] Only support official supported Ruby versions

2016-05-01 Thread Alex Boisvert
Agree with have to move on ... many gems no longer maintained for 1.8.7.


On Sat, Apr 30, 2016 at 11:42 PM, Antoine Toulme 
wrote:

> Can we do this?
> -1.4.x is the stable stream with 1.8.7 support (JRuby 1.6.7.2)
> -1.5.x is MRI 2.2.5, 2.3.1, JRuby 1.7.25 and Jruby 9.0.5.0.
>
> Also looking at Travis:
> JDK6 for 1.4.x. stream
> JDK7 for 1.4.x and 1.5.x
> JDK8 for 1.5.x and going forward
>
>
> > On Apr 30, 2016, at 2:26 PM, Peter Donald 
> wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 5:00 AM, Antoine Toulme 
> wrote:
> >> I would like to look into dropping all versions of Ruby except for the
> ones officially supported. Looking at MRI, this means 2.1.9, 2.2.5 and
> 2.3.1.
> >> For JRuby, that is 1.7.25 and 9.0.50.
> >>
> >> Does that make sense?
> >
> > It makes sense however we are stuck supporting jruby-1.6.7.2 as we use
> > buildr for several 2.x rails apps so I would like to support that as
> > well ... assuming it is not too much work.
> >
> > --
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Peter Donald
>
>


Re: [DISCUSS] Only support official supported Ruby versions

2016-05-01 Thread Peter Donald
On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Antoine Toulme  wrote:
> Can we do this?
> -1.4.x is the stable stream with 1.8.7 support (JRuby 1.6.7.2)
> -1.5.x is MRI 2.2.5, 2.3.1, JRuby 1.7.25 and Jruby 9.0.5.0.
>
> Also looking at Travis:
> JDK6 for 1.4.x. stream
> JDK7 for 1.4.x and 1.5.x
> JDK8 for 1.5.x and going forward

Seems reasonable.

-- 
Cheers,

Peter Donald


Re: [DISCUSS] Only support official supported Ruby versions

2016-05-01 Thread Antoine Toulme
Can we do this?
-1.4.x is the stable stream with 1.8.7 support (JRuby 1.6.7.2)
-1.5.x is MRI 2.2.5, 2.3.1, JRuby 1.7.25 and Jruby 9.0.5.0.

Also looking at Travis:
JDK6 for 1.4.x. stream
JDK7 for 1.4.x and 1.5.x
JDK8 for 1.5.x and going forward


> On Apr 30, 2016, at 2:26 PM, Peter Donald  wrote:
> 
> On Sun, May 1, 2016 at 5:00 AM, Antoine Toulme  
> wrote:
>> I would like to look into dropping all versions of Ruby except for the ones 
>> officially supported. Looking at MRI, this means 2.1.9, 2.2.5 and 2.3.1.
>> For JRuby, that is 1.7.25 and 9.0.50.
>> 
>> Does that make sense?
> 
> It makes sense however we are stuck supporting jruby-1.6.7.2 as we use
> buildr for several 2.x rails apps so I would like to support that as
> well ... assuming it is not too much work.
> 
> -- 
> Cheers,
> 
> Peter Donald