Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
26 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Gary Gregory-2
I would say that fixing the Tycho issue comes first.

Gary

On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 8:04 AM Robert Scholte <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> TLDR; introduce maven.experimental.buildconsumer and push Java
> requirement
> to Java 8
>
> now that Maven 3.6.2 is out for a couple of weeks, it seems like we
> didn't
> face real regressions.
> The only one might be tricky is the issue related to Tycho.
>
> However, I think we're ready to push Maven to the next level.
>
> For those actively reading this list, they should recognize the need for
> splitting up the pom as it is on the local system versus the pom being
> uploaded. Once we truly control this mechanism we can think of
> improvements on model 5.0.0 and new fileformats.
>
> I've created and implemented MNG-6656[1]. It also contains a zip with an
> example (original, patched, README) to understand what's happening.
>
> In order to make this successful, we need IDEs and CI Servers to
> understand and support these changes. The likely need to implement one of
> the interfaces[2].
> The new interface uses Java8 Functions (and especially SAXEventFactory is
> way easier to read+maintain with Java 8). I've tried to keep Maven Java 7
> compatible, but that was too hard to do.
> So I'd like to use this opportunity to move Maven forward and start
> requiring Java 8.
>
> There are some other improvements I'd like to add (those messages will
> follow), so this will imply that it will take some time before we do a
> new
> release.
>
> WDTY,
> Robert
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6656
> [2] https://github.com/apache/maven/compare/MNG-6656?expand=1
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Enrico Olivelli
Robert,

Il sab 28 set 2019, 14:04 Robert Scholte <[hidden email]> ha scritto:

> Hi,
>
> TLDR; introduce maven.experimental.buildconsumer and push Java
> requirement
> to Java 8
>
> now that Maven 3.6.2 is out for a couple of weeks, it seems like we
> didn't
> face real regressions.
> The only one might be tricky is the issue related to Tycho.
>
> However, I think we're ready to push Maven to the next level.
>
> For those actively reading this list, they should recognize the need for
> splitting up the pom as it is on the local system versus the pom being
> uploaded. Once we truly control this mechanism we can think of
> improvements on model 5.0.0 and new fileformats.
>
> I've created and implemented MNG-6656[1]. It also contains a zip with an
> example (original, patched, README) to understand what's happening.
>

This is really cool, I hope we get something like this very soon.

One overall comment from me is about using XML and particularly SAX.
We will have our Maven XML library but the core principle is that all of
the transformations are in a streaming fashion, there is no overall view of
the whole document, and you cannot go backward and you can't see the tags
after the current point.
SAX is more memory efficient but if this will be a base for the future we
should take into account future needs.

I will review carefully the patch when the approach is agreed by the
community. I have already taken a first look, if you create the pull
requests I can add comments

Enrico



> In order to make this successful, we need IDEs and CI Servers to
> understand and support these changes. The likely need to implement one of
> the interfaces[2].
> The new interface uses Java8 Functions (and especially SAXEventFactory is
> way easier to read+maintain with Java 8). I've tried to keep Maven Java 7
> compatible, but that was too hard to do.
> So I'd like to use this opportunity to move Maven forward and start
> requiring Java 8.
>
> There are some other improvements I'd like to add (those messages will
> follow), so this will imply that it will take some time before we do a
> new
> release.
>
> WDTY,
> Robert
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6656
> [2] https://github.com/apache/maven/compare/MNG-6656?expand=1
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Hervé BOUTEMY
In reply to this post by Gary Gregory-2
did someone confirm that it is related to Plexus to Tycho switch in MNG-6685?

Regards,

Hervé

Le samedi 28 septembre 2019, 16:42:27 CEST Robert Scholte a écrit :

> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6765
>
> I guess it is more about the pom-less part than the tycho-part.
>
> On Sat, 28 Sep 2019 15:55:28 +0200, Mickael Istria <[hidden email]>
>
> wrote:
> > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 2:04 PM Robert Scholte <[hidden email]>
> >
> > wrote:
> >> The only one might be tricky is the issue related to Tycho.
> >
> > What issue is this? Tycho integration-tests are being run against Maven
> > snapshots daily and no issue was spot nor report on Tycho side as far as
> > I
> > know.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]





---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Karl Heinz Marbaise-3
In reply to this post by Gary Gregory-2
Hi Mickael,

On 28.09.19 17:37, Mickael Istria wrote:

> On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 5:35 PM Karl Heinz Marbaise <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>> now that Maven 3.6.2 is out for a couple of weeks, it seems like we
>>> didn't face real regressions.
>>> The only one might be tricky is the issue related to Tycho.
>>
>> Feedback of Michael Istria states different? Or do I miss a thing?
>
>
> I think we should trust the various users who face this issue, and assume
> the issue exist until proven otherwise.
> This is likely a bug in Tycho and/or Polyglot Maven, and I believe this
> reveals that some of the important Tycho tests are not performed against
> latest Maven snapshots. I've started a thread on the [hidden email]
> mailing-list on htis topic.

Ah Ok...now I understand your post on tycho-dev list..

Thanks that explains it...

Of course we should wait for the feedback..

Kind regards
Karl Heinz Marbaise

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

rfscholte
In reply to this post by Enrico Olivelli
On Sat, 28 Sep 2019 16:53:00 +0200, Enrico Olivelli <[hidden email]>  
wrote:

> Robert,
>
> Il sab 28 set 2019, 14:04 Robert Scholte <[hidden email]> ha  
> scritto:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> TLDR; introduce maven.experimental.buildconsumer and push Java
>> requirement
>> to Java 8
>>
>> now that Maven 3.6.2 is out for a couple of weeks, it seems like we
>> didn't
>> face real regressions.
>> The only one might be tricky is the issue related to Tycho.
>>
>> However, I think we're ready to push Maven to the next level.
>>
>> For those actively reading this list, they should recognize the need for
>> splitting up the pom as it is on the local system versus the pom being
>> uploaded. Once we truly control this mechanism we can think of
>> improvements on model 5.0.0 and new fileformats.
>>
>> I've created and implemented MNG-6656[1]. It also contains a zip with an
>> example (original, patched, README) to understand what's happening.
>>
>
> This is really cool, I hope we get something like this very soon.
>
> One overall comment from me is about using XML and particularly SAX.
> We will have our Maven XML library but the core principle is that all of
> the transformations are in a streaming fashion, there is no overall view  
> of
> the whole document, and you cannot go backward and you can't see the tags
> after the current point.
> SAX is more memory efficient but if this will be a base for the future we
> should take into account future needs.

The choice for using XMLFilters is to be able to keep order of elements  
and also keep the comments (assuming the distributed pom is still an  
important source of information, otherwise we could decide to just  
recreate a new pom).
Validating *after* the resolved pom (phase 2, but before inheritence) will  
probably need extra care, since there might be an issue with the input  
location.

So please have a good look. As said, it will only be activated with the  
special flag and we simply need to start somewhere. It is all about  
collection first experiences, see what works and what doesn't.

Robert

>
> I will review carefully the patch when the approach is agreed by the
> community. I have already taken a first look, if you create the pull
> requests I can add comments
>
> Enrico
>
>
>
>> In order to make this successful, we need IDEs and CI Servers to
>> understand and support these changes. The likely need to implement one  
>> of
>> the interfaces[2].
>> The new interface uses Java8 Functions (and especially SAXEventFactory  
>> is
>> way easier to read+maintain with Java 8). I've tried to keep Maven Java  
>> 7
>> compatible, but that was too hard to do.
>> So I'd like to use this opportunity to move Maven forward and start
>> requiring Java 8.
>>
>> There are some other improvements I'd like to add (those messages will
>> follow), so this will imply that it will take some time before we do a
>> new
>> release.
>>
>> WDTY,
>> Robert
>>
>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6656
>> [2] https://github.com/apache/maven/compare/MNG-6656?expand=1
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Tibor Digana
In reply to this post by Gary Gregory-2
Robert, you'r really right, there is only 3.7.0-candidate
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project+%3D+MNG+AND+fixVersion+%3D+3.7.0-candidate>
version in Jira, see
https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/MNG?selectedItem=com.atlassian.jira.jira-projects-plugin:release-page
So this means MNG-6169 is in this discussion as well as it is 3.7.0.
As well as many other issues in the list including the MNG-6548 and
MNG-6656 too.

Internal code regarding J8 means that you have to rewrite the code to J8.
It can be done automatically but that's another topic.
As far as I know the Maven developers they do not always have private spare
time to do this job and therefore it is better to write a list of
priorities and find the human resources for these issue. I know how
difficult it is. This is the main problem.
I am not against J8. I only say that we have to deliver important things
from the user perspective first and then those less important whishes which
is called "priorities", nothing special.

Cheers
Tibor17







On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 8:14 PM Robert Scholte <[hidden email]> wrote:

> The versions upgrades of plugins are part of another topic, which are
> indeed 3.7.0 candidates.
>
> As said, the Java 8 update is not just about internal code improvements
> or
> changes. Maven will expose new APIs/SPIs that contain Java 8 Functions,
> so
> it must be seen as a requirement to implement the experimental
> buildconsumer feature.
>
> Robert
>
> On Sat, 28 Sep 2019 14:23:16 +0200, Tibor Digana <[hidden email]>
>
> wrote:
>
> > Hello guys,
> >
> > For the user community these two issues are important:
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6169
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6548
> > The Tycho project is the user as well.
> > The J8 is internal code improvement/change => lower priority than the
> > user's priority => release order/priorities/dedicated time spent in
> > development.
> >
> > Have a nice day.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Tibor17
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 2:08 PM Gary Gregory <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I would say that fixing the Tycho issue comes first.
> >>
> >> Gary
> >>
> >> On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 8:04 AM Robert Scholte <[hidden email]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > TLDR; introduce maven.experimental.buildconsumer and push Java
> >> > requirement
> >> > to Java 8
> >> >
> >> > now that Maven 3.6.2 is out for a couple of weeks, it seems like we
> >> > didn't
> >> > face real regressions.
> >> > The only one might be tricky is the issue related to Tycho.
> >> >
> >> > However, I think we're ready to push Maven to the next level.
> >> >
> >> > For those actively reading this list, they should recognize the need
> >> for
> >> > splitting up the pom as it is on the local system versus the pom being
> >> > uploaded. Once we truly control this mechanism we can think of
> >> > improvements on model 5.0.0 and new fileformats.
> >> >
> >> > I've created and implemented MNG-6656[1]. It also contains a zip
> with
> >> an
> >> > example (original, patched, README) to understand what's happening.
> >> >
> >> > In order to make this successful, we need IDEs and CI Servers to
> >> > understand and support these changes. The likely need to implement
> >> one of
> >> > the interfaces[2].
> >> > The new interface uses Java8 Functions (and especially
> >> SAXEventFactory is
> >> > way easier to read+maintain with Java 8). I've tried to keep Maven
> >> Java 7
> >> > compatible, but that was too hard to do.
> >> > So I'd like to use this opportunity to move Maven forward and start
> >> > requiring Java 8.
> >> >
> >> > There are some other improvements I'd like to add (those messages will
> >> > follow), so this will imply that it will take some time before we do a
> >> > new
> >> > release.
> >> >
> >> > WDTY,
> >> > Robert
> >> >
> >> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6656
> >> > [2] https://github.com/apache/maven/compare/MNG-6656?expand=1
> >> >
> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >> >
> >> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Enrico Olivelli
Tibor

Il lun 30 set 2019, 20:30 Tibor Digana <[hidden email]> ha scritto:

> Robert, you'r really right, there is only 3.7.0-candidate
> <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project+%3D+MNG+AND+fixVersion+%3D+3.7.0-candidate
> >
> version in Jira, see
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/MNG?selectedItem=com.atlassian.jira.jira-projects-plugin:release-page
> So this means MNG-6169 is in this discussion as well as it is 3.7.0.
> As well as many other issues in the list including the MNG-6548 and
> MNG-6656 too.
>
> Internal code regarding J8 means that you have to rewrite the code to J8.
> It can be done automatically but that's another topic.
>

You know that compiling for j8 does not require to use lamdas or whatever,
don't have to change your code,but only set target=8

Enrico


As far as I know the Maven developers they do not always have private spare

> time to do this job and therefore it is better to write a list of
> priorities and find the human resources for these issue. I know how
> difficult it is. This is the main problem.
> I am not against J8. I only say that we have to deliver important things
> from the user perspective first and then those less important whishes which
> is called "priorities", nothing special.
>
> Cheers
> Tibor17
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 8:14 PM Robert Scholte <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > The versions upgrades of plugins are part of another topic, which are
> > indeed 3.7.0 candidates.
> >
> > As said, the Java 8 update is not just about internal code improvements
> > or
> > changes. Maven will expose new APIs/SPIs that contain Java 8 Functions,
> > so
> > it must be seen as a requirement to implement the experimental
> > buildconsumer feature.
> >
> > Robert
> >
> > On Sat, 28 Sep 2019 14:23:16 +0200, Tibor Digana <[hidden email]
> >
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hello guys,
> > >
> > > For the user community these two issues are important:
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6169
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6548
> > > The Tycho project is the user as well.
> > > The J8 is internal code improvement/change => lower priority than the
> > > user's priority => release order/priorities/dedicated time spent in
> > > development.
> > >
> > > Have a nice day.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Tibor17
> > >
> > > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 2:08 PM Gary Gregory <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I would say that fixing the Tycho issue comes first.
> > >>
> > >> Gary
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 8:04 AM Robert Scholte <[hidden email]>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hi,
> > >> >
> > >> > TLDR; introduce maven.experimental.buildconsumer and push Java
> > >> > requirement
> > >> > to Java 8
> > >> >
> > >> > now that Maven 3.6.2 is out for a couple of weeks, it seems like we
> > >> > didn't
> > >> > face real regressions.
> > >> > The only one might be tricky is the issue related to Tycho.
> > >> >
> > >> > However, I think we're ready to push Maven to the next level.
> > >> >
> > >> > For those actively reading this list, they should recognize the need
> > >> for
> > >> > splitting up the pom as it is on the local system versus the pom
> being
> > >> > uploaded. Once we truly control this mechanism we can think of
> > >> > improvements on model 5.0.0 and new fileformats.
> > >> >
> > >> > I've created and implemented MNG-6656[1]. It also contains a zip
> > with
> > >> an
> > >> > example (original, patched, README) to understand what's happening.
> > >> >
> > >> > In order to make this successful, we need IDEs and CI Servers to
> > >> > understand and support these changes. The likely need to implement
> > >> one of
> > >> > the interfaces[2].
> > >> > The new interface uses Java8 Functions (and especially
> > >> SAXEventFactory is
> > >> > way easier to read+maintain with Java 8). I've tried to keep Maven
> > >> Java 7
> > >> > compatible, but that was too hard to do.
> > >> > So I'd like to use this opportunity to move Maven forward and start
> > >> > requiring Java 8.
> > >> >
> > >> > There are some other improvements I'd like to add (those messages
> will
> > >> > follow), so this will imply that it will take some time before we
> do a
> > >> > new
> > >> > release.
> > >> >
> > >> > WDTY,
> > >> > Robert
> > >> >
> > >> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6656
> > >> > [2] https://github.com/apache/maven/compare/MNG-6656?expand=1
> > >> >
> > >> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >> >
> > >> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Tibor Digana
Then why you are setting target to 1.8 without the code?
It does not make sense to set it without adapting the code.

You know what it looks like? Many people will hate me when I say this in
public.
It looks like a lobby. And there can be anything in background,
organizations, money flow, anything. But we do not do it for money. We are
doing it for the top notch quality and satisfied user.

We know the one of our user created a commit in a plugin where the code was
migrated automatically.
It helps but still you have to remove the "modernizer" annotations:

<plugin>
<groupId>org.gaul</groupId>
<artifactId>modernizer-maven-plugin</artifactId>
<version>1.8.0</version>
<executions>
  <execution>
<id>modernizer</id>
<phase>verify</phase>
<goals>
 <goal>modernizer</goal>
</goals>
  </execution>
</executions>
<configuration>
  <javaVersion>1.8</javaVersion>
</configuration>
</plugin>

    <dependency>
      <groupId>org.gaul</groupId>
      <artifactId>modernizer-maven-annotations</artifactId>
      <version>1.8.0</version>
    </dependency>

On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 9:04 PM Enrico Olivelli <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Tibor
>
> Il lun 30 set 2019, 20:30 Tibor Digana <[hidden email]> ha
> scritto:
>
> > Robert, you'r really right, there is only 3.7.0-candidate
> > <
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project+%3D+MNG+AND+fixVersion+%3D+3.7.0-candidate
> > >
> > version in Jira, see
> >
> >
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/MNG?selectedItem=com.atlassian.jira.jira-projects-plugin:release-page
> > So this means MNG-6169 is in this discussion as well as it is 3.7.0.
> > As well as many other issues in the list including the MNG-6548 and
> > MNG-6656 too.
> >
> > Internal code regarding J8 means that you have to rewrite the code to J8.
> > It can be done automatically but that's another topic.
> >
>
> You know that compiling for j8 does not require to use lamdas or whatever,
> don't have to change your code,but only set target=8
>
> Enrico
>
>
> As far as I know the Maven developers they do not always have private spare
> > time to do this job and therefore it is better to write a list of
> > priorities and find the human resources for these issue. I know how
> > difficult it is. This is the main problem.
> > I am not against J8. I only say that we have to deliver important things
> > from the user perspective first and then those less important whishes
> which
> > is called "priorities", nothing special.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Tibor17
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 30, 2019 at 8:14 PM Robert Scholte <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > The versions upgrades of plugins are part of another topic, which are
> > > indeed 3.7.0 candidates.
> > >
> > > As said, the Java 8 update is not just about internal code improvements
> > > or
> > > changes. Maven will expose new APIs/SPIs that contain Java 8 Functions,
> > > so
> > > it must be seen as a requirement to implement the experimental
> > > buildconsumer feature.
> > >
> > > Robert
> > >
> > > On Sat, 28 Sep 2019 14:23:16 +0200, Tibor Digana <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello guys,
> > > >
> > > > For the user community these two issues are important:
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6169
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6548
> > > > The Tycho project is the user as well.
> > > > The J8 is internal code improvement/change => lower priority than the
> > > > user's priority => release order/priorities/dedicated time spent in
> > > > development.
> > > >
> > > > Have a nice day.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > > Tibor17
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 2:08 PM Gary Gregory <[hidden email]
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I would say that fixing the Tycho issue comes first.
> > > >>
> > > >> Gary
> > > >>
> > > >> On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 8:04 AM Robert Scholte <
> [hidden email]>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Hi,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > TLDR; introduce maven.experimental.buildconsumer and push Java
> > > >> > requirement
> > > >> > to Java 8
> > > >> >
> > > >> > now that Maven 3.6.2 is out for a couple of weeks, it seems like
> we
> > > >> > didn't
> > > >> > face real regressions.
> > > >> > The only one might be tricky is the issue related to Tycho.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > However, I think we're ready to push Maven to the next level.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > For those actively reading this list, they should recognize the
> need
> > > >> for
> > > >> > splitting up the pom as it is on the local system versus the pom
> > being
> > > >> > uploaded. Once we truly control this mechanism we can think of
> > > >> > improvements on model 5.0.0 and new fileformats.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I've created and implemented MNG-6656[1]. It also contains a zip
> > > with
> > > >> an
> > > >> > example (original, patched, README) to understand what's
> happening.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > In order to make this successful, we need IDEs and CI Servers to
> > > >> > understand and support these changes. The likely need to implement
> > > >> one of
> > > >> > the interfaces[2].
> > > >> > The new interface uses Java8 Functions (and especially
> > > >> SAXEventFactory is
> > > >> > way easier to read+maintain with Java 8). I've tried to keep Maven
> > > >> Java 7
> > > >> > compatible, but that was too hard to do.
> > > >> > So I'd like to use this opportunity to move Maven forward and
> start
> > > >> > requiring Java 8.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > There are some other improvements I'd like to add (those messages
> > will
> > > >> > follow), so this will imply that it will take some time before we
> > do a
> > > >> > new
> > > >> > release.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > WDTY,
> > > >> > Robert
> > > >> >
> > > >> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6656
> > > >> > [2] https://github.com/apache/maven/compare/MNG-6656?expand=1
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Mickael Istria-2
In reply to this post by Gary Gregory-2
On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 5:37 PM Mickael Istria <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I believe this reveals that some of the important Tycho tests are not
> performed against latest Maven snapshots.
>

After a fix, the failures with polyglot build using more recent version of
Maven are now surfacing.
Too bad we didn't spot this missing configuration earlier, it would have
allowed to spot the regression against snapshot, before it get released...


--
Mickael Istria
Eclipse IDE <https://www.eclipse.org/downloads/eclipse-packages/>
developer, for Red Hat Developers <https://developers.redhat.com/>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Romain Manni-Bucau
+1 for java 8
Java 7 dev will likely stick to already published versions since the
ecosystem is already EOL anyway so no reason to not make maven java 8 based
IMHO

Le lun. 30 sept. 2019 à 22:16, Mickael Istria <[hidden email]> a écrit :

> On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 5:37 PM Mickael Istria <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > I believe this reveals that some of the important Tycho tests are not
> > performed against latest Maven snapshots.
> >
>
> After a fix, the failures with polyglot build using more recent version of
> Maven are now surfacing.
> Too bad we didn't spot this missing configuration earlier, it would have
> allowed to spot the regression against snapshot, before it get released...
>
>
> --
> Mickael Istria
> Eclipse IDE <https://www.eclipse.org/downloads/eclipse-packages/>
> developer, for Red Hat Developers <https://developers.redhat.com/>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

John Patrick
Been using Maven since spring 2005, so really happy with Maven...

I work on legacy applications so I still build on Java 6 & 7
weekly/monthly, but mainly on Java 8 with so experimenting with Java
11.

My feedback and input would be;

1) Drop Pre Java 8 support
It would hurt my as I use it for projects stuck on Java 6 and 7, but
it would also give me business case for needing to upgrade these
projects to supported versions.

2) Dual Support for Java 8 and 11
Bump base version of Java 8 and use multi-release version jars so core
components/plugins and use new features where needed.
e.g.
META-INF/MANIFEST.MF (Automatic-Module-Name)
META-INF/versions/11/module-info.class (really support modules)

3) extend toolchains support for all plugins/phases
Currently having issues i.e. wanting to execute surefire/failsafe with
a specific version but having to hack build.

4) Separate repo rebuilt for each major/minor release
Similar to Debian/Ubuntu where each release gets it's own brand new
repo with everything rebuilt. Just wildcard idea.
So each major version gets a new repo, so 3.x, 4.x, 5.x. or 3.6.x,
3.7.x. Everything in this repo allows a basic project to build, i.e.
compile, jar, test, install and deploy. I fell if we don't do anything
in another 10 years maven central might be say 1 PB. We need to think
about a way of starting to drop old old versions, do we need all the
jars that are needed for a maven 2.x build still in central???
Not sure the best idea but think something like this needs working on.

John
Maven Enthusiasts and Evangelist

On Mon, 30 Sep 2019 at 21:21, Romain Manni-Bucau <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> +1 for java 8
> Java 7 dev will likely stick to already published versions since the
> ecosystem is already EOL anyway so no reason to not make maven java 8 based
> IMHO
>
> Le lun. 30 sept. 2019 à 22:16, Mickael Istria <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
> > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 5:37 PM Mickael Istria <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > > I believe this reveals that some of the important Tycho tests are not
> > > performed against latest Maven snapshots.
> > >
> >
> > After a fix, the failures with polyglot build using more recent version of
> > Maven are now surfacing.
> > Too bad we didn't spot this missing configuration earlier, it would have
> > allowed to spot the regression against snapshot, before it get released...
> >
> >
> > --
> > Mickael Istria
> > Eclipse IDE <https://www.eclipse.org/downloads/eclipse-packages/>
> > developer, for Red Hat Developers <https://developers.redhat.com/>
> >

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Sylwester Lachiewicz
In reply to this post by Gary Gregory-2
+1 for Java 8 - let's kill 7 faster ;-))

Sylwester

wt., 1 paź 2019, 02:41 użytkownik Olivier Lamy <[hidden email]> napisał:

> +1 for Java 8
> it's time now and we will probably having more contributions as young/cool
> kids prefer using modern tools
> Yup the world is not only made with Old Grumpy grand dad working only with
> Java 5 :P )
>
> On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 04:14, Robert Scholte <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > The versions upgrades of plugins are part of another topic, which are
> > indeed 3.7.0 candidates.
> >
> > As said, the Java 8 update is not just about internal code improvements
> > or
> > changes. Maven will expose new APIs/SPIs that contain Java 8 Functions,
> > so
> > it must be seen as a requirement to implement the experimental
> > buildconsumer feature.
> >
> > Robert
> >
> > On Sat, 28 Sep 2019 14:23:16 +0200, Tibor Digana <[hidden email]
> >
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hello guys,
> > >
> > > For the user community these two issues are important:
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6169
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6548
> > > The Tycho project is the user as well.
> > > The J8 is internal code improvement/change => lower priority than the
> > > user's priority => release order/priorities/dedicated time spent in
> > > development.
> > >
> > > Have a nice day.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Tibor17
> > >
> > > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 2:08 PM Gary Gregory <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> I would say that fixing the Tycho issue comes first.
> > >>
> > >> Gary
> > >>
> > >> On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 8:04 AM Robert Scholte <[hidden email]>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Hi,
> > >> >
> > >> > TLDR; introduce maven.experimental.buildconsumer and push Java
> > >> > requirement
> > >> > to Java 8
> > >> >
> > >> > now that Maven 3.6.2 is out for a couple of weeks, it seems like we
> > >> > didn't
> > >> > face real regressions.
> > >> > The only one might be tricky is the issue related to Tycho.
> > >> >
> > >> > However, I think we're ready to push Maven to the next level.
> > >> >
> > >> > For those actively reading this list, they should recognize the need
> > >> for
> > >> > splitting up the pom as it is on the local system versus the pom
> being
> > >> > uploaded. Once we truly control this mechanism we can think of
> > >> > improvements on model 5.0.0 and new fileformats.
> > >> >
> > >> > I've created and implemented MNG-6656[1]. It also contains a zip
> > with
> > >> an
> > >> > example (original, patched, README) to understand what's happening.
> > >> >
> > >> > In order to make this successful, we need IDEs and CI Servers to
> > >> > understand and support these changes. The likely need to implement
> > >> one of
> > >> > the interfaces[2].
> > >> > The new interface uses Java8 Functions (and especially
> > >> SAXEventFactory is
> > >> > way easier to read+maintain with Java 8). I've tried to keep Maven
> > >> Java 7
> > >> > compatible, but that was too hard to do.
> > >> > So I'd like to use this opportunity to move Maven forward and start
> > >> > requiring Java 8.
> > >> >
> > >> > There are some other improvements I'd like to add (those messages
> will
> > >> > follow), so this will imply that it will take some time before we
> do a
> > >> > new
> > >> > release.
> > >> >
> > >> > WDTY,
> > >> > Robert
> > >> >
> > >> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6656
> > >> > [2] https://github.com/apache/maven/compare/MNG-6656?expand=1
> > >> >
> > >> >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >> >
> > >> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >
>
> --
> Olivier Lamy
> http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Enrico Olivelli
Robert,
Can you create a PR?

Enrico

Il mar 1 ott 2019, 07:19 Sylwester Lachiewicz <[hidden email]> ha
scritto:

> +1 for Java 8 - let's kill 7 faster ;-))
>
> Sylwester
>
> wt., 1 paź 2019, 02:41 użytkownik Olivier Lamy <[hidden email]> napisał:
>
> > +1 for Java 8
> > it's time now and we will probably having more contributions as
> young/cool
> > kids prefer using modern tools
> > Yup the world is not only made with Old Grumpy grand dad working only
> with
> > Java 5 :P )
> >
> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 04:14, Robert Scholte <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
> >
> > > The versions upgrades of plugins are part of another topic, which are
> > > indeed 3.7.0 candidates.
> > >
> > > As said, the Java 8 update is not just about internal code improvements
> > > or
> > > changes. Maven will expose new APIs/SPIs that contain Java 8 Functions,
> > > so
> > > it must be seen as a requirement to implement the experimental
> > > buildconsumer feature.
> > >
> > > Robert
> > >
> > > On Sat, 28 Sep 2019 14:23:16 +0200, Tibor Digana <
> [hidden email]
> > >
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hello guys,
> > > >
> > > > For the user community these two issues are important:
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6169
> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6548
> > > > The Tycho project is the user as well.
> > > > The J8 is internal code improvement/change => lower priority than the
> > > > user's priority => release order/priorities/dedicated time spent in
> > > > development.
> > > >
> > > > Have a nice day.
> > > >
> > > > Cheers
> > > > Tibor17
> > > >
> > > > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 2:08 PM Gary Gregory <[hidden email]
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> I would say that fixing the Tycho issue comes first.
> > > >>
> > > >> Gary
> > > >>
> > > >> On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 8:04 AM Robert Scholte <
> [hidden email]>
> > > >> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > Hi,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > TLDR; introduce maven.experimental.buildconsumer and push Java
> > > >> > requirement
> > > >> > to Java 8
> > > >> >
> > > >> > now that Maven 3.6.2 is out for a couple of weeks, it seems like
> we
> > > >> > didn't
> > > >> > face real regressions.
> > > >> > The only one might be tricky is the issue related to Tycho.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > However, I think we're ready to push Maven to the next level.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > For those actively reading this list, they should recognize the
> need
> > > >> for
> > > >> > splitting up the pom as it is on the local system versus the pom
> > being
> > > >> > uploaded. Once we truly control this mechanism we can think of
> > > >> > improvements on model 5.0.0 and new fileformats.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I've created and implemented MNG-6656[1]. It also contains a zip
> > > with
> > > >> an
> > > >> > example (original, patched, README) to understand what's
> happening.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > In order to make this successful, we need IDEs and CI Servers to
> > > >> > understand and support these changes. The likely need to implement
> > > >> one of
> > > >> > the interfaces[2].
> > > >> > The new interface uses Java8 Functions (and especially
> > > >> SAXEventFactory is
> > > >> > way easier to read+maintain with Java 8). I've tried to keep Maven
> > > >> Java 7
> > > >> > compatible, but that was too hard to do.
> > > >> > So I'd like to use this opportunity to move Maven forward and
> start
> > > >> > requiring Java 8.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > There are some other improvements I'd like to add (those messages
> > will
> > > >> > follow), so this will imply that it will take some time before we
> > do a
> > > >> > new
> > > >> > release.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > WDTY,
> > > >> > Robert
> > > >> >
> > > >> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6656
> > > >> > [2] https://github.com/apache/maven/compare/MNG-6656?expand=1
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> > Olivier Lamy
> > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

rfscholte
https://github.com/apache/maven/pull/286

On Tue, 01 Oct 2019 13:49:25 +0200, Enrico Olivelli <[hidden email]>  
wrote:

> Robert,
> Can you create a PR?
>
> Enrico
>
> Il mar 1 ott 2019, 07:19 Sylwester Lachiewicz <[hidden email]> ha
> scritto:
>
>> +1 for Java 8 - let's kill 7 faster ;-))
>>
>> Sylwester
>>
>> wt., 1 paź 2019, 02:41 użytkownik Olivier Lamy <[hidden email]>  
>> napisał:
>>
>> > +1 for Java 8
>> > it's time now and we will probably having more contributions as
>> young/cool
>> > kids prefer using modern tools
>> > Yup the world is not only made with Old Grumpy grand dad working only
>> with
>> > Java 5 :P )
>> >
>> > On Tue, 1 Oct 2019 at 04:14, Robert Scholte <[hidden email]>
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > > The versions upgrades of plugins are part of another topic, which  
>> are
>> > > indeed 3.7.0 candidates.
>> > >
>> > > As said, the Java 8 update is not just about internal code  
>> improvements
>> > > or
>> > > changes. Maven will expose new APIs/SPIs that contain Java 8  
>> Functions,
>> > > so
>> > > it must be seen as a requirement to implement the experimental
>> > > buildconsumer feature.
>> > >
>> > > Robert
>> > >
>> > > On Sat, 28 Sep 2019 14:23:16 +0200, Tibor Digana <
>> [hidden email]
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > wrote:
>> > >
>> > > > Hello guys,
>> > > >
>> > > > For the user community these two issues are important:
>> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6169
>> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6548
>> > > > The Tycho project is the user as well.
>> > > > The J8 is internal code improvement/change => lower priority than  
>> the
>> > > > user's priority => release order/priorities/dedicated time spent  
>> in
>> > > > development.
>> > > >
>> > > > Have a nice day.
>> > > >
>> > > > Cheers
>> > > > Tibor17
>> > > >
>> > > > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 2:08 PM Gary Gregory  
>> <[hidden email]
>> >
>> > > > wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > >> I would say that fixing the Tycho issue comes first.
>> > > >>
>> > > >> Gary
>> > > >>
>> > > >> On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 8:04 AM Robert Scholte <
>> [hidden email]>
>> > > >> wrote:
>> > > >>
>> > > >> > Hi,
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > TLDR; introduce maven.experimental.buildconsumer and push Java
>> > > >> > requirement
>> > > >> > to Java 8
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > now that Maven 3.6.2 is out for a couple of weeks, it seems  
>> like
>> we
>> > > >> > didn't
>> > > >> > face real regressions.
>> > > >> > The only one might be tricky is the issue related to Tycho.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > However, I think we're ready to push Maven to the next level.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > For those actively reading this list, they should recognize the
>> need
>> > > >> for
>> > > >> > splitting up the pom as it is on the local system versus the  
>> pom
>> > being
>> > > >> > uploaded. Once we truly control this mechanism we can think of
>> > > >> > improvements on model 5.0.0 and new fileformats.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > I've created and implemented MNG-6656[1]. It also contains a  
>> zip
>> > > with
>> > > >> an
>> > > >> > example (original, patched, README) to understand what's
>> happening.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > In order to make this successful, we need IDEs and CI Servers  
>> to
>> > > >> > understand and support these changes. The likely need to  
>> implement
>> > > >> one of
>> > > >> > the interfaces[2].
>> > > >> > The new interface uses Java8 Functions (and especially
>> > > >> SAXEventFactory is
>> > > >> > way easier to read+maintain with Java 8). I've tried to keep  
>> Maven
>> > > >> Java 7
>> > > >> > compatible, but that was too hard to do.
>> > > >> > So I'd like to use this opportunity to move Maven forward and
>> start
>> > > >> > requiring Java 8.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > There are some other improvements I'd like to add (those  
>> messages
>> > will
>> > > >> > follow), so this will imply that it will take some time before  
>> we
>> > do a
>> > > >> > new
>> > > >> > release.
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > WDTY,
>> > > >> > Robert
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6656
>> > > >> > [2] https://github.com/apache/maven/compare/MNG-6656?expand=1
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> > > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> > > >> >
>> > > >> >
>> > >
>> > >  
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Olivier Lamy
>> > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
>> >

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Elliotte Rusty Harold
In reply to this post by Gary Gregory-2
Theoretically that would work. In practice though, every project I've
seen convert to Java 8 rapidly starts adding lambdas that make the
code more obfuscated for no good reason and soon introduces hard
dependencies on Java 8, intentionally or otherwise. At a bare minimum,
a CI environment that runs Java 7 is required.

On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 8:25 AM Paul Hammant <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
> Would jdk 8 for maven itself and a target of 7 for the compiler (etc) for
> maven-using projects be ok?
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 1:15 PM Elliotte Rusty Harold <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Strong -1 on Java 8 as the minimum version. Google Cloud Platform has
> > lots of products and customers that still require Java 7. If Maven
> > requires Java 8, we'd have to stick to the latest of whichever release
> > does support Java 7 for at least a year and I'm guessing longer.
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 8:04 AM Robert Scholte <[hidden email]>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > TLDR; introduce maven.experimental.buildconsumer and push Java
> > requirement
> > > to Java 8
> > >
> > > now that Maven 3.6.2 is out for a couple of weeks, it seems like we
> > didn't
> > > face real regressions.
> > > The only one might be tricky is the issue related to Tycho.
> > >
> > > However, I think we're ready to push Maven to the next level.
> > >
> > > For those actively reading this list, they should recognize the need for
> > > splitting up the pom as it is on the local system versus the pom being
> > > uploaded. Once we truly control this mechanism we can think of
> > > improvements on model 5.0.0 and new fileformats.
> > >
> > > I've created and implemented MNG-6656[1]. It also contains a zip with an
> > > example (original, patched, README) to understand what's happening.
> > >
> > > In order to make this successful, we need IDEs and CI Servers to
> > > understand and support these changes. The likely need to implement one of
> > > the interfaces[2].
> > > The new interface uses Java8 Functions (and especially SAXEventFactory is
> > > way easier to read+maintain with Java 8). I've tried to keep Maven Java 7
> > > compatible, but that was too hard to do.
> > > So I'd like to use this opportunity to move Maven forward and start
> > > requiring Java 8.
> > >
> > > There are some other improvements I'd like to add (those messages will
> > > follow), so this will imply that it will take some time before we do a
> > new
> > > release.
> > >
> > > WDTY,
> > > Robert
> > >
> > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6656
> > > [2] https://github.com/apache/maven/compare/MNG-6656?expand=1
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > [hidden email]
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >



--
Elliotte Rusty Harold
[hidden email]

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Paul Hammant
Who codes for 18 months before discovering that qa/prod are not compatible,
anymore? Especially if Google ship a use-this-Pom starter.

On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 1:44 PM Elliotte Rusty Harold <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Theoretically that would work. In practice though, every project I've
> seen convert to Java 8 rapidly starts adding lambdas that make the
> code more obfuscated for no good reason and soon introduces hard
> dependencies on Java 8, intentionally or otherwise. At a bare minimum,
> a CI environment that runs Java 7 is required.
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 8:25 AM Paul Hammant <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Would jdk 8 for maven itself and a target of 7 for the compiler (etc) for
> > maven-using projects be ok?
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 1:15 PM Elliotte Rusty Harold <[hidden email]
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Strong -1 on Java 8 as the minimum version. Google Cloud Platform has
> > > lots of products and customers that still require Java 7. If Maven
> > > requires Java 8, we'd have to stick to the latest of whichever release
> > > does support Java 7 for at least a year and I'm guessing longer.
> > >
> > > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 8:04 AM Robert Scholte <[hidden email]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > TLDR; introduce maven.experimental.buildconsumer and push Java
> > > requirement
> > > > to Java 8
> > > >
> > > > now that Maven 3.6.2 is out for a couple of weeks, it seems like we
> > > didn't
> > > > face real regressions.
> > > > The only one might be tricky is the issue related to Tycho.
> > > >
> > > > However, I think we're ready to push Maven to the next level.
> > > >
> > > > For those actively reading this list, they should recognize the need
> for
> > > > splitting up the pom as it is on the local system versus the pom
> being
> > > > uploaded. Once we truly control this mechanism we can think of
> > > > improvements on model 5.0.0 and new fileformats.
> > > >
> > > > I've created and implemented MNG-6656[1]. It also contains a zip
> with an
> > > > example (original, patched, README) to understand what's happening.
> > > >
> > > > In order to make this successful, we need IDEs and CI Servers to
> > > > understand and support these changes. The likely need to implement
> one of
> > > > the interfaces[2].
> > > > The new interface uses Java8 Functions (and especially
> SAXEventFactory is
> > > > way easier to read+maintain with Java 8). I've tried to keep Maven
> Java 7
> > > > compatible, but that was too hard to do.
> > > > So I'd like to use this opportunity to move Maven forward and start
> > > > requiring Java 8.
> > > >
> > > > There are some other improvements I'd like to add (those messages
> will
> > > > follow), so this will imply that it will take some time before we do
> a
> > > new
> > > > release.
> > > >
> > > > WDTY,
> > > > Robert
> > > >
> > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6656
> > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/maven/compare/MNG-6656?expand=1
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Elliotte Rusty Harold
> > > [hidden email]
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >
> > >
>
>
>
> --
> Elliotte Rusty Harold
> [hidden email]
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Emmanuel Bourg
In reply to this post by Gary Gregory-2
Le 03/10/2019 à 16:54, Karl Heinz Marbaise a écrit :

> Hm.. first Java 7 is out for eight years now (2011) (End of live) and
> has no public updates for security/bug fixes etc. since 2015

RedHat still maintains OpenJDK 7 until June 2020 [1].

Emmanuel Bourg

[1] https://access.redhat.com/articles/1299013#OpenJDK_Lifecycle_Dates_and_RHEL_versions

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Karl Heinz Marbaise-3
In reply to this post by Gary Gregory-2
Hi,

On 03.10.19 17:03, Tibor Digana wrote:
> This is not very serious discussion since we saw users on our mailing
> list who said that he is using Java 1.6 compiler and JDK7 in Maven.

Would that change anything? Using JDK 8 for Maven and using JDK 6 for
compiling/test...


> Serious discussion would uncover pros/cons and impact analysis.
>
> I would have a problem with Java 1.8 in target and source code but I
> have problem that we excluded our users from the VOTE.

> Regarding Java 1.7 we clearly uncovered the migration plan, versions of
> plugins, core etc. Here nothing like that exists - only that somebody
> created a Jira ticket.

Hm...all plugins etc. running on JDK 7+...so in the first step we just
upgrade the minimum for Maven Core only (3.7.0)... (Apart from having a
plugin which is JDK8 minimum already).

Plugins can upgrade to JDK 8 minimum as needed/wished afterwards (may be
we could do a version identification...but at the moment I don't see a
need for that cause they work on JDK7+).

Kind regards
Karl Heinz Marbaise

>
> Technically I would be interested if somebody could explain what NEW
> Security API is in Java 1.8 and performance impact of Streams API.
> That's the impact in the source code.
> Somebody has other questions too.
> Then we can write Wiki as well as rules, conditions and plan.
>
> Cheers
> Tibor17
>
> On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 4:55 PM Karl Heinz Marbaise <[hidden email]
> <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>
>     On 03.10.19 14:15, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
>      > Strong -1 on Java 8 as the minimum version. Google Cloud Platform has
>      > lots of products and customers that still require Java 7. If Maven
>      > requires Java 8, we'd have to stick to the latest of whichever
>     release
>      > does support Java 7 for at least a year and I'm guessing longer.
>
>     Hm.. first Java 7 is out for eight years now (2011) (End of live) and
>     has no public updates for security/bug fixes etc. since 2015
>
>     Furthermore Java 8 is out for five years (2014) so to be honest I
>     wouldn't trust an environment which is not upgrading etc. in particular
>     in a clould environment...
>
>     Why hadn't started Google to update their environment over the time to
>     JDK 8 etc. (I think they have much more resources than anyone).
>
>
>     One more thing is:
>        There is a difference between running Maven to build for example
>        with JDK 8 and running your resulting artifacts (see toolchain
>     comment
>        from Stephen Connolly..
>
>     Kind regards
>     Karl Heinz Marbaise
>
>
>     [1]:
>     https://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/java-se-support-roadmap.html
>
>
>      >
>      > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 8:04 AM Robert Scholte
>     <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
>      >>
>      >> Hi,
>      >>
>      >> TLDR; introduce maven.experimental.buildconsumer and push Java
>     requirement
>      >> to Java 8
>      >>
>      >> now that Maven 3.6.2 is out for a couple of weeks, it seems like
>     we didn't
>      >> face real regressions.
>      >> The only one might be tricky is the issue related to Tycho.
>      >>
>      >> However, I think we're ready to push Maven to the next level.
>      >>
>      >> For those actively reading this list, they should recognize the
>     need for
>      >> splitting up the pom as it is on the local system versus the pom
>     being
>      >> uploaded. Once we truly control this mechanism we can think of
>      >> improvements on model 5.0.0 and new fileformats.
>      >>
>      >> I've created and implemented MNG-6656[1]. It also contains a zip
>     with an
>      >> example (original, patched, README) to understand what's happening.
>      >>
>      >> In order to make this successful, we need IDEs and CI Servers to
>      >> understand and support these changes. The likely need to
>     implement one of
>      >> the interfaces[2].
>      >> The new interface uses Java8 Functions (and especially
>     SAXEventFactory is
>      >> way easier to read+maintain with Java 8). I've tried to keep
>     Maven Java 7
>      >> compatible, but that was too hard to do.
>      >> So I'd like to use this opportunity to move Maven forward and start
>      >> requiring Java 8.
>      >>
>      >> There are some other improvements I'd like to add (those
>     messages will
>      >> follow), so this will imply that it will take some time before
>     we do a new
>      >> release.
>      >>
>      >> WDTY,
>      >> Robert
>      >>
>      >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6656
>      >> [2] https://github.com/apache/maven/compare/MNG-6656?expand=1
>      >>
>      >>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

stephenconnolly
On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 16:49, Karl Heinz Marbaise <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> On 03.10.19 17:03, Tibor Digana wrote:
> > This is not very serious discussion since we saw users on our mailing
> > list who said that he is using Java 1.6 compiler and JDK7 in Maven.
>
> Would that change anything? Using JDK 8 for Maven and using JDK 6 for
> compiling/test...
>
>
> > Serious discussion would uncover pros/cons and impact analysis.
> >
> > I would have a problem with Java 1.8 in target and source code but I
> > have problem that we excluded our users from the VOTE.
>
> > Regarding Java 1.7 we clearly uncovered the migration plan, versions of
> > plugins, core etc. Here nothing like that exists - only that somebody
> > created a Jira ticket.
>
> Hm...all plugins etc. running on JDK 7+...so in the first step we just
> upgrade the minimum for Maven Core only (3.7.0)... (Apart from having a
> plugin which is JDK8 minimum already).
>
> Plugins can upgrade to JDK 8 minimum as needed/wished afterwards (may be
> we could do a version identification...but at the moment I don't see a
> need for that cause they work on JDK7+).
>

Also, to my mind, unless the plugin specifically needs features in Maven
3.7.0 there is added reason for the plugin to stay on JDK7 until it bumps
the core version of Maven it depends on (or it finds a use-case requiring
Java 8)

Finally, upgrading to Java 8 is basically a must have for easier TLS
certificate validation as the JDK7 distributions do not all have good
current TLS root certs


> Kind regards
> Karl Heinz Marbaise
>
> >
> > Technically I would be interested if somebody could explain what NEW
> > Security API is in Java 1.8 and performance impact of Streams API.
> > That's the impact in the source code.
> > Somebody has other questions too.
> > Then we can write Wiki as well as rules, conditions and plan.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Tibor17
> >
> > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 4:55 PM Karl Heinz Marbaise <[hidden email]
> > <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
> >
> >     On 03.10.19 14:15, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
> >      > Strong -1 on Java 8 as the minimum version. Google Cloud Platform
> has
> >      > lots of products and customers that still require Java 7. If Maven
> >      > requires Java 8, we'd have to stick to the latest of whichever
> >     release
> >      > does support Java 7 for at least a year and I'm guessing longer.
> >
> >     Hm.. first Java 7 is out for eight years now (2011) (End of live) and
> >     has no public updates for security/bug fixes etc. since 2015
> >
> >     Furthermore Java 8 is out for five years (2014) so to be honest I
> >     wouldn't trust an environment which is not upgrading etc. in
> particular
> >     in a clould environment...
> >
> >     Why hadn't started Google to update their environment over the time
> to
> >     JDK 8 etc. (I think they have much more resources than anyone).
> >
> >
> >     One more thing is:
> >        There is a difference between running Maven to build for example
> >        with JDK 8 and running your resulting artifacts (see toolchain
> >     comment
> >        from Stephen Connolly..
> >
> >     Kind regards
> >     Karl Heinz Marbaise
> >
> >
> >     [1]:
> >     https://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/java-se-support-roadmap.html
> >
> >
> >      >
> >      > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 8:04 AM Robert Scholte
> >     <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
> >      >>
> >      >> Hi,
> >      >>
> >      >> TLDR; introduce maven.experimental.buildconsumer and push Java
> >     requirement
> >      >> to Java 8
> >      >>
> >      >> now that Maven 3.6.2 is out for a couple of weeks, it seems like
> >     we didn't
> >      >> face real regressions.
> >      >> The only one might be tricky is the issue related to Tycho.
> >      >>
> >      >> However, I think we're ready to push Maven to the next level.
> >      >>
> >      >> For those actively reading this list, they should recognize the
> >     need for
> >      >> splitting up the pom as it is on the local system versus the pom
> >     being
> >      >> uploaded. Once we truly control this mechanism we can think of
> >      >> improvements on model 5.0.0 and new fileformats.
> >      >>
> >      >> I've created and implemented MNG-6656[1]. It also contains a zip
> >     with an
> >      >> example (original, patched, README) to understand what's
> happening.
> >      >>
> >      >> In order to make this successful, we need IDEs and CI Servers to
> >      >> understand and support these changes. The likely need to
> >     implement one of
> >      >> the interfaces[2].
> >      >> The new interface uses Java8 Functions (and especially
> >     SAXEventFactory is
> >      >> way easier to read+maintain with Java 8). I've tried to keep
> >     Maven Java 7
> >      >> compatible, but that was too hard to do.
> >      >> So I'd like to use this opportunity to move Maven forward and
> start
> >      >> requiring Java 8.
> >      >>
> >      >> There are some other improvements I'd like to add (those
> >     messages will
> >      >> follow), so this will imply that it will take some time before
> >     we do a new
> >      >> release.
> >      >>
> >      >> WDTY,
> >      >> Robert
> >      >>
> >      >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6656
> >      >> [2] https://github.com/apache/maven/compare/MNG-6656?expand=1
> >      >>
> >      >>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Maven 3.7.0

Tibor Digana
The topic related to TLS is only related to runtime, means JDK, which is
under the control of the particular user or CI.
I guess the user can easily find the answer:
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/50824789/why-am-i-getting-received-fatal-alert-protocol-version-or-peer-not-authentic

The thing is that we need to specify:
+ advantages of Java 1.8 in code (Lambda, brief code, maybe)
+ disadvantages of Java 1.8 in code (Streams performance when/how/what
approach???)

Write notices for developers on the internal Wiki:
+ toolchains
+ limitations and solutions for disadvantages
+ conditions when and how to migrate from J7 to J8

and then we should Vote for J8.

And there are users who is has J6 and J7 and they may require us to
maintain the old version 3.6.x.
What to do in this case?
Is the toolchain enough? Usually it is in ordinal projects!

Cheers
T


On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 5:52 PM Stephen Connolly <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> On Thu, 3 Oct 2019 at 16:49, Karl Heinz Marbaise <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > On 03.10.19 17:03, Tibor Digana wrote:
> > > This is not very serious discussion since we saw users on our mailing
> > > list who said that he is using Java 1.6 compiler and JDK7 in Maven.
> >
> > Would that change anything? Using JDK 8 for Maven and using JDK 6 for
> > compiling/test...
> >
> >
> > > Serious discussion would uncover pros/cons and impact analysis.
> > >
> > > I would have a problem with Java 1.8 in target and source code but I
> > > have problem that we excluded our users from the VOTE.
> >
> > > Regarding Java 1.7 we clearly uncovered the migration plan, versions of
> > > plugins, core etc. Here nothing like that exists - only that somebody
> > > created a Jira ticket.
> >
> > Hm...all plugins etc. running on JDK 7+...so in the first step we just
> > upgrade the minimum for Maven Core only (3.7.0)... (Apart from having a
> > plugin which is JDK8 minimum already).
> >
> > Plugins can upgrade to JDK 8 minimum as needed/wished afterwards (may be
> > we could do a version identification...but at the moment I don't see a
> > need for that cause they work on JDK7+).
> >
>
> Also, to my mind, unless the plugin specifically needs features in Maven
> 3.7.0 there is added reason for the plugin to stay on JDK7 until it bumps
> the core version of Maven it depends on (or it finds a use-case requiring
> Java 8)
>
> Finally, upgrading to Java 8 is basically a must have for easier TLS
> certificate validation as the JDK7 distributions do not all have good
> current TLS root certs
>
>
> > Kind regards
> > Karl Heinz Marbaise
> >
> > >
> > > Technically I would be interested if somebody could explain what NEW
> > > Security API is in Java 1.8 and performance impact of Streams API.
> > > That's the impact in the source code.
> > > Somebody has other questions too.
> > > Then we can write Wiki as well as rules, conditions and plan.
> > >
> > > Cheers
> > > Tibor17
> > >
> > > On Thu, Oct 3, 2019 at 4:55 PM Karl Heinz Marbaise <[hidden email]
> > > <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
> > >
> > >     On 03.10.19 14:15, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
> > >      > Strong -1 on Java 8 as the minimum version. Google Cloud
> Platform
> > has
> > >      > lots of products and customers that still require Java 7. If
> Maven
> > >      > requires Java 8, we'd have to stick to the latest of whichever
> > >     release
> > >      > does support Java 7 for at least a year and I'm guessing longer.
> > >
> > >     Hm.. first Java 7 is out for eight years now (2011) (End of live)
> and
> > >     has no public updates for security/bug fixes etc. since 2015
> > >
> > >     Furthermore Java 8 is out for five years (2014) so to be honest I
> > >     wouldn't trust an environment which is not upgrading etc. in
> > particular
> > >     in a clould environment...
> > >
> > >     Why hadn't started Google to update their environment over the time
> > to
> > >     JDK 8 etc. (I think they have much more resources than anyone).
> > >
> > >
> > >     One more thing is:
> > >        There is a difference between running Maven to build for example
> > >        with JDK 8 and running your resulting artifacts (see toolchain
> > >     comment
> > >        from Stephen Connolly..
> > >
> > >     Kind regards
> > >     Karl Heinz Marbaise
> > >
> > >
> > >     [1]:
> > >
> https://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/java-se-support-roadmap.html
> > >
> > >
> > >      >
> > >      > On Sat, Sep 28, 2019 at 8:04 AM Robert Scholte
> > >     <[hidden email] <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote:
> > >      >>
> > >      >> Hi,
> > >      >>
> > >      >> TLDR; introduce maven.experimental.buildconsumer and push Java
> > >     requirement
> > >      >> to Java 8
> > >      >>
> > >      >> now that Maven 3.6.2 is out for a couple of weeks, it seems
> like
> > >     we didn't
> > >      >> face real regressions.
> > >      >> The only one might be tricky is the issue related to Tycho.
> > >      >>
> > >      >> However, I think we're ready to push Maven to the next level.
> > >      >>
> > >      >> For those actively reading this list, they should recognize the
> > >     need for
> > >      >> splitting up the pom as it is on the local system versus the
> pom
> > >     being
> > >      >> uploaded. Once we truly control this mechanism we can think of
> > >      >> improvements on model 5.0.0 and new fileformats.
> > >      >>
> > >      >> I've created and implemented MNG-6656[1]. It also contains a
> zip
> > >     with an
> > >      >> example (original, patched, README) to understand what's
> > happening.
> > >      >>
> > >      >> In order to make this successful, we need IDEs and CI Servers
> to
> > >      >> understand and support these changes. The likely need to
> > >     implement one of
> > >      >> the interfaces[2].
> > >      >> The new interface uses Java8 Functions (and especially
> > >     SAXEventFactory is
> > >      >> way easier to read+maintain with Java 8). I've tried to keep
> > >     Maven Java 7
> > >      >> compatible, but that was too hard to do.
> > >      >> So I'd like to use this opportunity to move Maven forward and
> > start
> > >      >> requiring Java 8.
> > >      >>
> > >      >> There are some other improvements I'd like to add (those
> > >     messages will
> > >      >> follow), so this will imply that it will take some time before
> > >     we do a new
> > >      >> release.
> > >      >>
> > >      >> WDTY,
> > >      >> Robert
> > >      >>
> > >      >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MNG-6656
> > >      >> [2] https://github.com/apache/maven/compare/MNG-6656?expand=1
> > >      >>
> > >      >>
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >
>
12