Yes I can call a vote, what I will likely propose is that we do one more release that is Java 6 and then drop Java 6 support for subsequent releases
Rob On 19/04/2014 09:11, "Andy Seaborne" <[email protected]> wrote: >Rob, > >Do you want to call a VOTE on this? > >Then Jena 2.12.0? > > Andy > >On 31/03/14 11:36, Andy Seaborne wrote: >> On 31/03/14 10:34, Rob Vesse wrote: >>> Hi All >>> >>> Andy raised an interesting point recently that historically the Jena >>> project >>> has only guaranteed to maintain compatibility with the 2 most recent >>> versions of Java. As of the recent Java 8 release this means that >>> Java 6 is >>> technically now outside of the range of versions that we intend to >>> maintain >>> compatibility with. >>> >>> Dropping of Java 6 support is not going to happen overnight so this >>> email is >>> intended to serve as advance notice that this will happen at some >>> point in >>> the future and to request feedback on this. Note that it is likely >>> that in >>> the short term code will remain Java 6 compatible and so a workaround >>> after >>> Java 6 support is dropped will be to build from source yourself >>> >>> Are there people out there who are currently reliant on Java 6 and >>>cannot >>> move to Java 7/8 for whatever reason? If so what sort of timescale >>>would >>> you consider reasonable for dropping Java 6 support? >>> >>> Thanks for your feedback, >>> >>> Rob >> >> This whole version thing is a bit of wobbly tower of choices from the >> top down. >> >> Fuseki2 requires Java7 because the version of Jetty (v9) it uses for the >> standalone server requires Java7 (which in turn is because the version >> of the servletAPI is "Servlet 3.0+"). >> >> As it is Java7, there is use of "Files" and "Path" which are quite >>useful. >> >> It does not oblige the Jena libraries to be Java7. >> >> Andy >> >
