I reviewed the PR. Looks like it's headed in a good direction. I
wouldn't bother creating a 1.10 branch. We can do that after we tag a
release and do the normal branch cleanup.
On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 9:37 AM Mike Miller wrote:
>
> I am working on a 1.10 branch which is the 1.9 branch + JDK8 +
>
I am working on a 1.10 branch which is the 1.9 branch + JDK8 +
updates/ignores to appease the modernizer. @Christopher
I took your changes to PropertyType from your branch
and they look pretty good. I think we are able to update a lot in that
class since it is fairly self contained. A lot of th
I think the main hold up is that I had committed to doing the JDK8
changes we discussed to get a 1.10, and I haven't had time to finish
following through (too focused on 2.1 development and other tasks). I
had thought there was interest in a 1.10, but for me, I'd be just as
happy aborting that plan
I agree with Mike that one or the other should happen. If the hold up is
the modernizer plugin, and we know those issues are addressed in 2.0+,
maybe we consider ignoring those issues in the 1.10 line.
On Wed, Dec 11, 2019 at 9:57 AM Mike Miller wrote:
> If the demand is still there for a 1.10,
If the demand is still there for a 1.10, I am willing to help out. But in
the meantime, we could still release a 1.9.4, regardless of whether we have
a 1.10 or not. The last bug fix for 1.9 was in April and there have been
some fixes and improvements that users are waiting on.
On Tue, Nov 12, 20
Thanks Christopher.
On Tue, Nov 12, 2019 at 3:48 PM Christopher wrote:
> It was pointed out to me that some of the problems I had using the
> modernizer-maven-plugin could be alleviated by adding granular
> exceptions in the modernizer config. I'll see if I can make that
> happen.
>
> On Fri, No
It was pointed out to me that some of the problems I had using the
modernizer-maven-plugin could be alleviated by adding granular
exceptions in the modernizer config. I'll see if I can make that
happen.
On Fri, Nov 8, 2019 at 7:14 PM Christopher wrote:
>
> So, one of the problems I've run into mi
So, one of the problems I've run into migrating the 1.x code to JDK8
is that we still have Mock in the API. That was removed in 2.x.
However, in 1.9, MockConfiguration extends a non-public API,
AccumuloConfiguration, which uses non-public Guava types for
Predicates. Code-modernization/quality check
As agreed in the recent [VOTE] thread, we will be releasing a 1.10.0
that bumps the minimum runtime Java version to 8.
I am beginning to work on getting the branch (currently still named
1.9) ready for release in accordance with this plan. As such, I will
be preparing a pull request that bumps the
