Re: [RESULT] Re: Please retweet and vote

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RESULT] Re: Please retweet and vote

stephenconnolly
Hervé and I discussed on irc earlier today.

My suggestion - I was going to write up tomorrow - is that we drop 7 for
3.6.x

We should focus 3.6.x on making the codebase Java 8 (lambdas, replace
File____Stream with the non-file handle leak version, adopt Path, etc) with
a view to encourage contributions... and best support for Java 9 (such that
if you run j9 we recommend 3.6.x)

We can keep 3.5.x alive for security issues and S1/S2 backports for the
next 6 months or so. Close all other lines.

75% of people were fine with requiring Java 8

Also remember that Java 7 ships with out of date TLS root CA certs and iirc
does not support SNI, so the reality is you shouldn't be running Maven with
Java 7 unless you are within a secure intranet with a corp proxy that can
perform the TLS verification for you.

(Now openjdk 7 is a different story, but if we say some subset of 7 then
people will assume oracle 7 also)

On Sun 10 Sep 2017 at 17:52, Arnaud Héritier <[hidden email]> wrote:

> But on twitter thus probably far from being a good representation of our
> users ...
>
> Le dim. 10 sept. 2017 à 18:45, Gary Gregory <[hidden email]> a
> écrit :
>
> > On Sep 10, 2017 10:33, "Robert Scholte" <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > So what would be the conclusion?
> >
> > 35% want to keep Java7 as JRE for Maven for a shorter or longer period?
> >
> > IMHO that's a lot
> >
> >
> > but less than the 65% who do not, an overwhelming majority.
> >
> > Gary
> >
> >
> > Robert
> >
> >
> > On Sun, 10 Sep 2017 11:55:20 +0200, Stephen Connolly <
> > [hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > So poll results:
> > >
> > > 493 votes cast
> > >
> > > 25% want Java 7,8&9 for Maven 3.6.x
> > > 65% want Java 8&9 for Maven 3.6.x
> > > 10% want Java 8&9 for Maven 3.6.x and 6 months of backporting to 3.5.x
> > >
> > > On Sat 9 Sep 2017 at 11:50, Stephen Connolly <
> > > [hidden email]> wrote:
> > >
> > > https://twitter.com/asfmavenproject/status/906451059966693376
> > >> --
> > >> Sent from my phone
> > >>
> > >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> --
> -----
> Arnaud Héritier
> http://aheritier.net
> Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com
> Twitter/Skype : aheritier
>
--
Sent from my phone
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RESULT] Re: Please retweet and vote

Michael Osipov-2
Am 2017-09-10 um 19:07 schrieb Stephen Connolly:
> Hervé and I discussed on irc earlier today.
>
> My suggestion - I was going to write up tomorrow - is that we drop 7 for
> 3.6.x
>
> We should focus 3.6.x on making the codebase Java 8 (lambdas, replace
> File____Stream with the non-file handle leak version, adopt Path, etc) with
> a view to encourage contributions... and best support for Java 9 (such that
> if you run j9 we recommend 3.6.x)

This will take months to properly rewrite Maven core. I'd rather see
this for Maven 4 and continue to polish Maven with 3.5.x, 3.6.x, etc.

Unless no one will do this within a short timeframe, I see no benefit here.


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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RESULT] Re: Please retweet and vote

Baptiste MATHUS
In reply to this post by stephenconnolly
Hello,

Only lurking those days, but chiming in quickly here :-).

2017-09-10 20:54 GMT+02:00 Robert Scholte <[hidden email]>:

> On Sun, 10 Sep 2017 20:21:11 +0200, Stephen Connolly <
> [hidden email]> wrote:
>
> On Sun 10 Sep 2017 at 19:04, Tibor Digana <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> Are we facing new API regarding networking and security useful in Java 8?
>>>
>>> When I first saw these options I asked myself what benefit would have the
>>> User and Jenkins from Java 8.
>>> And second question was whether we would be so flexible to rewrite the
>>> code
>>> and use Lambda fully anywhere in the code.
>>>
>>
>>
>> There is the social aspect. If you are a potential new contributor to
>> Maven
>> and you look at our heavy Java 1.3 convention codebase (ok, I'm being a
>> demagogue, it's had a bit updated to 5.0) are you going to be encouraged
>> to
>> step forward?
>>
>> How can you make small improvements and demonstrate you are a safe pair of
>> hands to gain the commit bit?
>>
>> Now if we have the opertunity to make lots of tidy up and you can show you
>> are a safe pair of hands, retaining binary compatibility with older
>> plugins, making the code more readable, finding file handle leaks, etc...
>> well now you have a welcome path to demonstrate your skills.... while
>> gaining familiarity with the codebase so that when we turn around to start
>> on Maven 5.0.x you can join in the fun.
>>
>> Now that is not a technical argument, but we are a community first... so
>> maybe the technical arguments are not so right to push!
>>
>>
> bq. but we are a community first
>
> What's the definition of community: the large user group or the few we're
> hoping to find who can help working on Maven?
> And if we're focusing on the latter, shouldn't the twitter question be:
>
> I want to become a Maven developer
> [] right now!
> [] only if Maven requires Java 8 ( so I can use lambda's, etc.)
>

This is definitely one the things we put forward for moving Jenkins to Java
8 recently [1], keeping contribution appealing.
Because, well, that's great the Maven community would try to help large
companies not be bothered by any kind of upgrade, like Free Enterprise
software support :-).
But I think this is a dead-end, those kind of teams/companies won't upgrade
*anyway*.

Looking at the stats, I would think there's actually not much debate:
people not wanting to upgrade, well, won't upgrade... And proportion is not
that high.
What is the actual issue anyway? They will keep using 3.5.x for 3 years? So
what, I bet they already do. No, wait, they're not, they're using 2.2.1.
I just checked, the company I left 1 year ago is still running 3.2.1, and I
don't expect them to upgrade anytime soon...

Maven backward compatibility is great, so IMO don't bother spending time
with JDK7.
The Maven dev team should IMO concentrate of making Maven great, not
supporting a big variety of versions/flavours developers will hate the
codebase each time they remember "urgh, I can't use this!".
The less combinatorials, the better for anyone working on her/his free time
:-\.

My 2 cents

-- Baptiste
[1] https://jenkins.io/blog/2017/01/17/Jenkins-is-upgrading-to-Java-8/