Re: [lang] To Java 7

2016-10-24 Thread Stian Soiland-Reyes
I don't think we need to keep arguing this, when we discussed this last time we said we'll do an intermediate Java 7-version - if there are too many screams (I suspect almost none) then we can be more careful before moving to Java 8 afterwards, which would give the biggest benefit (and need more he

Re: [lang] To Java 7

2016-10-24 Thread Matt Sicker
Keeping open a maintenance branch for 3.5 sounds like a good idea. If it really does end up taking over a year before a 3.6 release needs to be made, then Java 6 may be a moot point by then. Either way, it sounds like migrating to Java 7 for a 3.6 release isn't a bad idea unless it turns out there

Re: [lang] To Java 7

2016-10-24 Thread Emmanuel Bourg
Le 23/10/2016 à 09:30, Gary Gregory a écrit : > Thoughts? If this means doing only trivial internal code changes with no benefit to the end users then I don't think it's worth it. I would either stick to Java 6 or go to Java 8 and offer some real new stuff. Emmanuel Bourg -

Re: [lang] To Java 7

2016-10-24 Thread Jochen Wiedmann
On Mon, Oct 24, 2016 at 3:42 AM, sebb wrote: > It seems that Java 6 is still supported until Dec 2018 if the user > purchases Extended Support. Given that a) We don't enforce users to upgrade. b) The decision to move to Java 7 doesn't prevent us from opening a maintenance branch f

Re: [lang] To Java 7

2016-10-23 Thread Matt Sicker
Oh, neat, I already made the same argument in the linked post, so I have no need to type it all out again. ;) On 23 October 2016 at 21:20, sebb wrote: > That is not what the referenced message says. > > On 24 October 2016 at 03:06, Dave Brosius wrote: > > Of course not. people with ancient buil

Re: [lang] To Java 7

2016-10-23 Thread sebb
That is not what the referenced message says. On 24 October 2016 at 03:06, Dave Brosius wrote: > Of course not. people with ancient builds never touch anything. > > > > On 10/23/2016 09:49 PM, Matt Sicker wrote: >> >> Do you really think the users who are paying for extended Java 6 support >> are

Re: [lang] To Java 7

2016-10-23 Thread Dave Brosius
Of course not. people with ancient builds never touch anything. On 10/23/2016 09:49 PM, Matt Sicker wrote: Do you really think the users who are paying for extended Java 6 support are upgrading any of their dependencies anymore? On 23 October 2016 at 20:42, sebb wrote: It seems that Java 6

Re: [lang] To Java 7

2016-10-23 Thread Gary Gregory
I do not see why we should handcuff ourselves like that to Java 6 either. Gary On Oct 23, 2016 6:50 PM, "Matt Sicker" wrote: > Do you really think the users who are paying for extended Java 6 support > are upgrading any of their dependencies anymore? > > On 23 October 2016 at 20:42, sebb wrote

Re: [lang] To Java 7

2016-10-23 Thread Matt Sicker
Do you really think the users who are paying for extended Java 6 support are upgrading any of their dependencies anymore? On 23 October 2016 at 20:42, sebb wrote: > It seems that Java 6 is still supported until Dec 2018 if the user > purchases Extended Support. > > There are users who cannot or

Re: [lang] To Java 7

2016-10-23 Thread sebb
It seems that Java 6 is still supported until Dec 2018 if the user purchases Extended Support. There are users who cannot or will not upgrade until then [1] [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/6ad212d930574a4fc3c149242561fb7228b272d9b80a4daaeee4326f@%3Cuser.commons.apache.org%3E On 23 Octo

Re: [lang] To Java 7

2016-10-23 Thread Matt Sicker
+1, maybe there are some new features that can be added that are relevant to JDK 7 besides just language level cleanups. On 23 October 2016 at 07:07, Dave Brosius wrote: > +1 > > > On 10/23/2016 03:30 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: > >> Hi All: >> >> Now that 3.5 is out, I think it is time to require J

Re: [lang] To Java 7

2016-10-23 Thread Dave Brosius
+1 On 10/23/2016 03:30 AM, Gary Gregory wrote: Hi All: Now that 3.5 is out, I think it is time to require Java 7. Thoughts? Gary - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mai

Re: [lang] To Java 7

2016-10-23 Thread Stian Soiland-Reyes
+1, in line with earlier discussed upgrade path we can then do a Java 7 minor version before we jump to Java 8. On 23 Oct 2016 9:39 am, "Benedikt Ritter" wrote: > I don't see improvements from a user perspective when upgrading to Java 7, > but Java 6 is long EOL. So +1 from my side. > > Pascal S

Re: [lang] To Java 7

2016-10-23 Thread Benedikt Ritter
I don't see improvements from a user perspective when upgrading to Java 7, but Java 6 is long EOL. So +1 from my side. Pascal Schumacher schrieb am So., 23. Okt. 2016 um 09:31 Uhr: > +1 > > Am 23.10.2016 um 09:30 schrieb Gary Gregory: > > Hi All: > > > > Now that 3.5 is out, I think it is time t

Re: [lang] To Java 7

2016-10-23 Thread Pascal Schumacher
+1 Am 23.10.2016 um 09:30 schrieb Gary Gregory: Hi All: Now that 3.5 is out, I think it is time to require Java 7. Thoughts? Gary - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mai