> On Mar 12, 2018, at 1:13 PM, Ralph Goers wrote:
>
>
>
>> On Mar 12, 2018, at 9:27 AM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
>>
>> Hi Ralph,
>>
>> On Wed, 07 Mar 2018 11:56:32 -0700 Ralph Goers wrote:
>>>
>>> Actually, you really do need to use a multi-release jar to include a
>>> module-info class file.
> On Mar 12, 2018, at 9:27 AM, Jörg Schaible wrote:
>
> Hi Ralph,
>
> On Wed, 07 Mar 2018 11:56:32 -0700 Ralph Goers wrote:
>
>>> On Mar 7, 2018, at 2:47 AM, Stephen Colebourne
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> 1) Moving to Java 9 as a base would be a terrible choice. Java 9 is a
>>> six-month release whi
Hi Ralph,
On Wed, 07 Mar 2018 11:56:32 -0700 Ralph Goers wrote:
>> On Mar 7, 2018, at 2:47 AM, Stephen Colebourne
>> wrote:
>>
>> 1) Moving to Java 9 as a base would be a terrible choice. Java 9 is a
>> six-month release which is about to be replaced by Java 10, which will
>> then be replaced b
Log4j has run into a few of them. The OSGi bind tool has some issues although
the latest release fixes some of them. Android’s tools have problems with any
jar that contains anything Java 9 related. We have created issues against both
of these.
Ralph
> On Mar 8, 2018, at 6:33 AM, Gilles wrot
Hello.
On Wed, 7 Mar 2018 22:21:44 +, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
On 7 March 2018 at 18:56, Ralph Goers
wrote:
Actually, you really do need to use a multi-release jar to include a
module-info class file. Otherwise it may be sitting alongside of
classes compiled for an earlier java release a
On 7 March 2018 at 18:56, Ralph Goers wrote:
> Actually, you really do need to use a multi-release jar to include a
> module-info class file. Otherwise it may be sitting alongside of classes
> compiled for an earlier java release and various tools will fail because of
> it.
Then those tools ne
> On Mar 7, 2018, at 2:47 AM, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
>
> 1) Moving to Java 9 as a base would be a terrible choice. Java 9 is a
> six-month release which is about to be replaced by Java 10, which will
> then be replaced by Java 11. Thus, Java 8 is the only sensible
> baseline right now.
>
>
Hi.
On Wed, 7 Mar 2018 09:47:00 +, Stephen Colebourne wrote:
1) Moving to Java 9 as a base would be a terrible choice. Java 9 is a
six-month release which is about to be replaced by Java 10, which
will
then be replaced by Java 11. Thus, Java 8 is the only sensible
baseline right now.
May
1) Moving to Java 9 as a base would be a terrible choice. Java 9 is a
six-month release which is about to be replaced by Java 10, which will
then be replaced by Java 11. Thus, Java 8 is the only sensible
baseline right now.
2) Compiling a single jar file such that it works on Java 8 but has a
modu
Hi All:
On a slightly different tack, I think that it is way to early to require
Java 9 for ANY Commons components.
I see a case for updating all components to at least Java 7, and hopefully
8.
What you will likely hear from some quarters are comments of the type "What
feature of Java X is requi
10 matches
Mail list logo
