On 23 July 2013 14:59, Stephen Connolly wrote:
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>
> Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
> compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will still
> require to stick to t
+1
Op Tue, 23 Jul 2013 15:59:49 +0200 schreef Stephen Connolly
:
This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven
Core.
Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will still
requ
+1 non-binding
2013/7/25 Mirko Friedenhagen
> +1 non-binding
> On Jul 23, 2013 4:00 PM, "Stephen Connolly" <
> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven
> Core.
> >
> > Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project
+1 non-binding
On Jul 23, 2013 4:00 PM, "Stephen Connolly"
wrote:
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>
> Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
> compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will still
> r
+1
On 7/23/13 8:59 AM, Stephen Connolly wrote:
This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will still
require to stick to the mini
The split verifier should improve cli performance once core and most
plugins are on -target 1.6
Any committer is free to call a vote to up the minimum to 1.7 if they want
to.
>From a build tool perspective there are some advantages in 1.6 as a
baseline (compiler api, scripting api, split verifier
Am 07/24/13 04:00, schrieb jieryn:
>
> Move forward or die. If you are stuck on 1.5, you can continue to use
> a full stack that is already supported. I am so sick of hearing people
> complain that they will be broken if a JDK migration to a newer
> version is undertaken. No, you are not broken, y
Greetings,
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:52 PM, Christian Schulte wrote:
> Why change '-target 1.5' to '-target 1.6' without any requirement to do
> so ? Either stay with '-target 1.5' or introduce something which
> requires '-target 1.6' as a justification. Don't get me wrong. I don't
> get the poin
Am 07/24/13 03:10, schrieb jieryn:
> Greetings,
>
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Christian Schulte wrote:
>> Why Java 6 ? Seriously. It does not add any value to Maven compared to
>> Java 5. Java 7 is what provides new APIs Maven could benefit from. Why
>> give up on Java 5 in favour of Java
Greetings,
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Christian Schulte wrote:
> Why Java 6 ? Seriously. It does not add any value to Maven compared to
> Java 5. Java 7 is what provides new APIs Maven could benefit from. Why
> give up on Java 5 in favour of Java 6 ?
"Politics is a strong and _slow_ boring
Why Java 6 ? Seriously. It does not add any value to Maven compared to
Java 5. Java 7 is what provides new APIs Maven could benefit from. Why
give up on Java 5 in favour of Java 6 ?
--
Christian
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-un
I'm cool with that.
+1
PS: The EOL date for Java 1.5 was not just for zOS, it applied to all
platforms for the IBM JDK, AIX and Linux included.
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 8:42 AM, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> +1
>
> 2013/7/23 Stephen Connolly :
> > This vote is to cover the minimum required version of
+1
2013/7/23 Stephen Connolly :
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>
> Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
> compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will still
> require to stick to the minimum Java
+1
2013/7/23 Stephen Connolly :
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>
> Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
> compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will still
> require to stick to the minimum Java
+1 binding
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
+1 binding
Wayne
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:59 AM, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>
> Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
> compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will
+1 (non-binding)
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:59 PM, Dennis Lundberg wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Stephen Connolly
> wrote:
> > This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven
> Core.
> >
> > Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project tha
+1 (binding)
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 3:59 PM, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>
> Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
> compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will still
On Tuesday, 23 July 2013, Michael-O <1983-01...@gmx.net> wrote:
> Am 2013-07-23 15:59, schrieb Stephen Connolly:
>
>> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>>
>>
> Given than most companies/folks react only when something has been
> discontinued, I would move t
+1
Jeff
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:40 PM, Michael-O <1983-01...@gmx.net> wrote:
> Am 2013-07-23 15:59, schrieb Stephen Connolly:
>
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>>
>>
> Given than most companies/folks react only when something has been
> discontinu
Am 2013-07-23 15:59, schrieb Stephen Connolly:
This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
Given than most companies/folks react only when something has been
discontinued, I would move to Java 6 as a baseline not before Christman
2013. First release in 2014 can
+1 nb
On Jul 23, 2013 4:00 PM, "Stephen Connolly"
wrote:
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>
> Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
> compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will still
> require to
+1
Arnaud
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:17 PM, Baptiste MATHUS wrote:
> +1
> Le 23 juil. 2013 16:30, "Lennart Jörelid" a
> écrit :
>
> > +1000 which is a rather odd number for a vote; blame Stephen
> instead
> > of me. :)
> >
> > I think we can skip the 1.6 release of the JDK as a Maven ba
+1
Le 23 juil. 2013 16:30, "Lennart Jörelid" a
écrit :
> +1000 which is a rather odd number for a vote; blame Stephen instead
> of me. :)
>
> I think we can skip the 1.6 release of the JDK as a Maven basis; JDK 1.6 is
> at or near EOL and the step from one
> minimum JDK version to another
+1 non binding.
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Jeff Jensen <
jeffjen...@upstairstechnology.com> wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:59 AM, Stephen Connolly
> wrote:
> > This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven
> Core.
> >
> > Maven Plugins prod
+1 (non-binding)
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:59 AM, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>
> Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
> compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will s
+1 (non-binding)
/Anders (mobile)
Den 23 jul 2013 16:00 skrev "Stephen Connolly" <
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com>:
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>
> Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
> compatible with older vers
+1000 which is a rather odd number for a vote; blame Stephen instead
of me. :)
I think we can skip the 1.6 release of the JDK as a Maven basis; JDK 1.6 is
at or near EOL and the step from one
minimum JDK version to another (i.e. JDK 1.7) would be just as painful as
the step to JDK 1.6 - bu
+1, unsure if you could have muddied the essentially simple question
much more, but OK. :-p
On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
>
> On 23 July 2013 14:59, Stephen Connolly
> wrote:
>
>> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Cor
On Tue, 23 Jul 2013 14:59:49 +0100
Stephen Connolly wrote:
+1 (non binding)
tony.
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will still
require to stick to the minimum Java requirements of that Maven Core
version.
+1 (binding)
On 23 July 2013 14:59, Stephen Connolly wrote:
> This vote is to cover the minimum required version of Java for Maven Core.
>
> Maven Plugins produced by the Apache Maven Project that are flagged as
> compatible with older versions of Maven Core as their baseline will still
> requir
32 matches
Mail list logo
