[VOTE] All new (non-patch) releases of Maven Core after 30th Sep 2013 to require Java 6+

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

Re: [VOTE] All new (non-patch) releases of Maven Core after 30th Sep 2013 to require Java 6+

ChrisGWarp
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 <[hidden email]> wrote:

> +1
>
> 2013/7/23 Stephen Connolly <[hidden email]>:
> > 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. In other words, if for example maven-compiler-plugin advertises
> > compatibility with Maven Core 2.0.11+ then that will still need to be
> > compiled targeting Java 1.4 and only using dependencies that are aligned
> > with that runtime requirement.
> >
> > Additionally patch releases to existing releases of Maven Core will not
> be
> > subject to this requirement.
> >
> > For example [example]*if* this vote passes and *if* on Sep 29th we
> release
> > Maven 3.2.0 and *if* on Oct 2nd we release Maven 2.0.12, Maven 2.2.2,
> Maven
> > 3.0.6, Maven 3.1.1, Maven 3.2.1 and Maven 3.3.0 (due to say some security
> > issue that affected all versions of Maven) then only Maven 3.3.0 would be
> > require Java 6 as a minimum runtime requirement, the 2.0.12 release would
> > still require Java 1.4 and the 2.2.2, 3.0.6, 3.1.1 and 3.2.1 versions
> would
> > all still require Java 1.5.[/example]
> >
> > This is not a requirement that 3rd party plugins need use Java 6 as a
> > minimum. Third party plugins are free to require any Java version >= the
> > corresponding Maven minimum requirement, though obviously from a users
> > perspective it is best if plugins try to adhere to our contracts for
> > corresponding versions of Maven Core.
> >
> > Justification for the cut-off date:
> >
> > * Oracle has gone end of life on Java 6 Feb 2013 (note that there is
> still
> > extended and sustaining support for existing Oracle customers using Java
> 5)
> > * IBM will go end of life for z/OS on 30th Sep 2013 (other platforms are
> > still with support, but there are other Java vendors for other platforms)
> > * Apple no longer supports any hardware that does not have at least an
> > Apple Java 6 version available.
> > * Red Hat is providing support for OpenJDK 6
> > * HP-UX, OpenVMS, and Tru64 all have a Java 6 implementation available.
> >
> > As I see it, that essentially ensures that for the vast majority of
> > platforms there is a very strong likelihood of a Java 6 compatible
> version
> > of Java available for that platform. Toolchains support or forking of the
> > compiler and surefire can provide support for users who still need to
> build
> > with older versions of Java (e.g., as was the case for Java 1.4.2 with
> > Maven 2.2.1). Additionally users who are forced to use a java version
> older
> > than Java 6 also are likely unable to upgrade their version of Maven, so
> > this change will not affect them
> >
> > This vote is open for 72 hours. A minimum of three +1 binding votes (i.e.
> > from the PMC) and the majority of votes cast from committers will be
> > required to pass this vote.
> >
> > +1000: Yes, and when can we have the vote to go for Java 7 as a minimum?
> > (This option is equivalent to +1 but provides people the ability to
> > indicate an additional preference while not contributing to the
> inevitible
> > noise)
> > +1: Yes
> > 0: No opinion
> > -1: No
> >
> > -Stephen
>
>
>
> --
> Olivier Lamy
> Ecetera: http://ecetera.com.au
> 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: [VOTE] All new (non-patch) releases of Maven Core after 30th Sep 2013 to require Java 6+

Christian Schulte
In reply to this post by stephenconnolly
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: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] All new (non-patch) releases of Maven Core after 30th Sep 2013 to require Java 6+

jieryn
Greetings,

On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Christian Schulte <[hidden email]> 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 of hard boards." -- Max Weber

My emphasis.

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] All new (non-patch) releases of Maven Core after 30th Sep 2013 to require Java 6+

Christian Schulte
Am 07/24/13 03:10, schrieb jieryn:

> Greetings,
>
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 8:59 PM, Christian Schulte <[hidden email]> 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 of hard boards." -- Max Weber
>
> My emphasis.
>

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 point.

--
Christian


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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] All new (non-patch) releases of Maven Core after 30th Sep 2013 to require Java 6+

jieryn
Greetings,

On Tue, Jul 23, 2013 at 9:52 PM, Christian Schulte <[hidden email]> 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 point.

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, you simply can not
upgrade. There is a huge difference between being broken and not
having an upgrade path.

Should we ensure that Apache Maven can fit on a 1.4mb floppy disk,
also?? I mean, we're breaking everyone that runs Apache Maven on a
networkless machine without any USB drive and has to use 1.4mb
floppies to transfer Maven Central, etc.

This form of anti-migration argument has less value than a "without
any requirement" argument for not migrating.

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] All new (non-patch) releases of Maven Core after 30th Sep 2013 to require Java 6+

Christian Schulte
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, you simply can not
> upgrade. There is a huge difference between being broken and not
> having an upgrade path.

Upgrade to Java 7 because you make use of the new APIs Java 7 introduces
or stay with Java 5. Java 6 does not introduce anything interesting to
Maven core. Java 7 does.

> This form of anti-migration argument has less value than a "without
> any requirement" argument for not migrating.

I do not argue against migrating. I do argue against migrating without
any reason.

Since this is a vote thread:

+1000 (non-binding) as long as someone explains why there is any need to
change '-target 1.5' to '-target 1.6'. Seriously. I don't get it. You
are really just changing the class file version and nothing else without
any reason. I would like to know the reasioning. Nothing more.

--
Christan


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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] All new (non-patch) releases of Maven Core after 30th Sep 2013 to require Java 6+

stephenconnolly
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 for faster initial
classloading, etc).

From a non build tool perspective, String.isEmpty() is rather paltry though!

On Wednesday, 24 July 2013, Christian Schulte wrote:

> 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, you simply can not
> > upgrade. There is a huge difference between being broken and not
> > having an upgrade path.
>
> Upgrade to Java 7 because you make use of the new APIs Java 7 introduces
> or stay with Java 5. Java 6 does not introduce anything interesting to
> Maven core. Java 7 does.
>
> > This form of anti-migration argument has less value than a "without
> > any requirement" argument for not migrating.
>
> I do not argue against migrating. I do argue against migrating without
> any reason.
>
> Since this is a vote thread:
>
> +1000 (non-binding) as long as someone explains why there is any need to
> change '-target 1.5' to '-target 1.6'. Seriously. I don't get it. You
> are really just changing the class file version and nothing else without
> any reason. I would like to know the reasioning. Nothing more.
>
> --
> Christan
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] <javascript:;>
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email] <javascript:;>
>
>

--
Sent from my phone
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] All new (non-patch) releases of Maven Core after 30th Sep 2013 to require Java 6+

jdcasey
In reply to this post by stephenconnolly
+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 minimum Java requirements of that Maven Core
> version. In other words, if for example maven-compiler-plugin advertises
> compatibility with Maven Core 2.0.11+ then that will still need to be
> compiled targeting Java 1.4 and only using dependencies that are aligned
> with that runtime requirement.
>
> Additionally patch releases to existing releases of Maven Core will not be
> subject to this requirement.
>
> For example [example]*if* this vote passes and *if* on Sep 29th we release
> Maven 3.2.0 and *if* on Oct 2nd we release Maven 2.0.12, Maven 2.2.2, Maven
> 3.0.6, Maven 3.1.1, Maven 3.2.1 and Maven 3.3.0 (due to say some security
> issue that affected all versions of Maven) then only Maven 3.3.0 would be
> require Java 6 as a minimum runtime requirement, the 2.0.12 release would
> still require Java 1.4 and the 2.2.2, 3.0.6, 3.1.1 and 3.2.1 versions would
> all still require Java 1.5.[/example]
>
> This is not a requirement that 3rd party plugins need use Java 6 as a
> minimum. Third party plugins are free to require any Java version >= the
> corresponding Maven minimum requirement, though obviously from a users
> perspective it is best if plugins try to adhere to our contracts for
> corresponding versions of Maven Core.
>
> Justification for the cut-off date:
>
> * Oracle has gone end of life on Java 6 Feb 2013 (note that there is still
> extended and sustaining support for existing Oracle customers using Java 5)
> * IBM will go end of life for z/OS on 30th Sep 2013 (other platforms are
> still with support, but there are other Java vendors for other platforms)
> * Apple no longer supports any hardware that does not have at least an
> Apple Java 6 version available.
> * Red Hat is providing support for OpenJDK 6
> * HP-UX, OpenVMS, and Tru64 all have a Java 6 implementation available.
>
> As I see it, that essentially ensures that for the vast majority of
> platforms there is a very strong likelihood of a Java 6 compatible version
> of Java available for that platform. Toolchains support or forking of the
> compiler and surefire can provide support for users who still need to build
> with older versions of Java (e.g., as was the case for Java 1.4.2 with
> Maven 2.2.1). Additionally users who are forced to use a java version older
> than Java 6 also are likely unable to upgrade their version of Maven, so
> this change will not affect them
>
> This vote is open for 72 hours. A minimum of three +1 binding votes (i.e.
> from the PMC) and the majority of votes cast from committers will be
> required to pass this vote.
>
> +1000: Yes, and when can we have the vote to go for Java 7 as a minimum?
> (This option is equivalent to +1 but provides people the ability to
> indicate an additional preference while not contributing to the inevitible
> noise)
> +1: Yes
> 0: No opinion
> -1: No
>
> -Stephen
>


--
John Casey
Developer, PMC Member - Apache Maven (http://maven.apache.org)
GitHub - http://github.com/jdcasey

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] All new (non-patch) releases of Maven Core after 30th Sep 2013 to require Java 6+

Mirko Friedenhagen-2
In reply to this post by stephenconnolly
+1 non-binding
On Jul 23, 2013 4:00 PM, "Stephen Connolly" <[hidden email]>
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 minimum Java requirements of that Maven Core
> version. In other words, if for example maven-compiler-plugin advertises
> compatibility with Maven Core 2.0.11+ then that will still need to be
> compiled targeting Java 1.4 and only using dependencies that are aligned
> with that runtime requirement.
>
> Additionally patch releases to existing releases of Maven Core will not be
> subject to this requirement.
>
> For example [example]*if* this vote passes and *if* on Sep 29th we release
> Maven 3.2.0 and *if* on Oct 2nd we release Maven 2.0.12, Maven 2.2.2, Maven
> 3.0.6, Maven 3.1.1, Maven 3.2.1 and Maven 3.3.0 (due to say some security
> issue that affected all versions of Maven) then only Maven 3.3.0 would be
> require Java 6 as a minimum runtime requirement, the 2.0.12 release would
> still require Java 1.4 and the 2.2.2, 3.0.6, 3.1.1 and 3.2.1 versions would
> all still require Java 1.5.[/example]
>
> This is not a requirement that 3rd party plugins need use Java 6 as a
> minimum. Third party plugins are free to require any Java version >= the
> corresponding Maven minimum requirement, though obviously from a users
> perspective it is best if plugins try to adhere to our contracts for
> corresponding versions of Maven Core.
>
> Justification for the cut-off date:
>
> * Oracle has gone end of life on Java 6 Feb 2013 (note that there is still
> extended and sustaining support for existing Oracle customers using Java 5)
> * IBM will go end of life for z/OS on 30th Sep 2013 (other platforms are
> still with support, but there are other Java vendors for other platforms)
> * Apple no longer supports any hardware that does not have at least an
> Apple Java 6 version available.
> * Red Hat is providing support for OpenJDK 6
> * HP-UX, OpenVMS, and Tru64 all have a Java 6 implementation available.
>
> As I see it, that essentially ensures that for the vast majority of
> platforms there is a very strong likelihood of a Java 6 compatible version
> of Java available for that platform. Toolchains support or forking of the
> compiler and surefire can provide support for users who still need to build
> with older versions of Java (e.g., as was the case for Java 1.4.2 with
> Maven 2.2.1). Additionally users who are forced to use a java version older
> than Java 6 also are likely unable to upgrade their version of Maven, so
> this change will not affect them
>
> This vote is open for 72 hours. A minimum of three +1 binding votes (i.e.
> from the PMC) and the majority of votes cast from committers will be
> required to pass this vote.
>
> +1000: Yes, and when can we have the vote to go for Java 7 as a minimum?
> (This option is equivalent to +1 but provides people the ability to
> indicate an additional preference while not contributing to the inevitible
> noise)
> +1: Yes
> 0: No opinion
> -1: No
>
> -Stephen
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] All new (non-patch) releases of Maven Core after 30th Sep 2013 to require Java 6+

Andreas Gudian
+1 non-binding


2013/7/25 Mirko Friedenhagen <[hidden email]>

> +1 non-binding
> On Jul 23, 2013 4:00 PM, "Stephen Connolly" <
> [hidden email]>
> 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 minimum Java requirements of that Maven Core
> > version. In other words, if for example maven-compiler-plugin advertises
> > compatibility with Maven Core 2.0.11+ then that will still need to be
> > compiled targeting Java 1.4 and only using dependencies that are aligned
> > with that runtime requirement.
> >
> > Additionally patch releases to existing releases of Maven Core will not
> be
> > subject to this requirement.
> >
> > For example [example]*if* this vote passes and *if* on Sep 29th we
> release
> > Maven 3.2.0 and *if* on Oct 2nd we release Maven 2.0.12, Maven 2.2.2,
> Maven
> > 3.0.6, Maven 3.1.1, Maven 3.2.1 and Maven 3.3.0 (due to say some security
> > issue that affected all versions of Maven) then only Maven 3.3.0 would be
> > require Java 6 as a minimum runtime requirement, the 2.0.12 release would
> > still require Java 1.4 and the 2.2.2, 3.0.6, 3.1.1 and 3.2.1 versions
> would
> > all still require Java 1.5.[/example]
> >
> > This is not a requirement that 3rd party plugins need use Java 6 as a
> > minimum. Third party plugins are free to require any Java version >= the
> > corresponding Maven minimum requirement, though obviously from a users
> > perspective it is best if plugins try to adhere to our contracts for
> > corresponding versions of Maven Core.
> >
> > Justification for the cut-off date:
> >
> > * Oracle has gone end of life on Java 6 Feb 2013 (note that there is
> still
> > extended and sustaining support for existing Oracle customers using Java
> 5)
> > * IBM will go end of life for z/OS on 30th Sep 2013 (other platforms are
> > still with support, but there are other Java vendors for other platforms)
> > * Apple no longer supports any hardware that does not have at least an
> > Apple Java 6 version available.
> > * Red Hat is providing support for OpenJDK 6
> > * HP-UX, OpenVMS, and Tru64 all have a Java 6 implementation available.
> >
> > As I see it, that essentially ensures that for the vast majority of
> > platforms there is a very strong likelihood of a Java 6 compatible
> version
> > of Java available for that platform. Toolchains support or forking of the
> > compiler and surefire can provide support for users who still need to
> build
> > with older versions of Java (e.g., as was the case for Java 1.4.2 with
> > Maven 2.2.1). Additionally users who are forced to use a java version
> older
> > than Java 6 also are likely unable to upgrade their version of Maven, so
> > this change will not affect them
> >
> > This vote is open for 72 hours. A minimum of three +1 binding votes (i.e.
> > from the PMC) and the majority of votes cast from committers will be
> > required to pass this vote.
> >
> > +1000: Yes, and when can we have the vote to go for Java 7 as a minimum?
> > (This option is equivalent to +1 but provides people the ability to
> > indicate an additional preference while not contributing to the
> inevitible
> > noise)
> > +1: Yes
> > 0: No opinion
> > -1: No
> >
> > -Stephen
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [VOTE] All new (non-patch) releases of Maven Core after 30th Sep 2013 to require Java 6+

rfscholte
In reply to this post by stephenconnolly
+1

Op Tue, 23 Jul 2013 15:59:49 +0200 schreef Stephen Connolly  
<[hidden email]>:

> 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. In other words, if for example maven-compiler-plugin advertises
> compatibility with Maven Core 2.0.11+ then that will still need to be
> compiled targeting Java 1.4 and only using dependencies that are aligned
> with that runtime requirement.
>
> Additionally patch releases to existing releases of Maven Core will not  
> be
> subject to this requirement.
>
> For example [example]*if* this vote passes and *if* on Sep 29th we  
> release
> Maven 3.2.0 and *if* on Oct 2nd we release Maven 2.0.12, Maven 2.2.2,  
> Maven
> 3.0.6, Maven 3.1.1, Maven 3.2.1 and Maven 3.3.0 (due to say some security
> issue that affected all versions of Maven) then only Maven 3.3.0 would be
> require Java 6 as a minimum runtime requirement, the 2.0.12 release would
> still require Java 1.4 and the 2.2.2, 3.0.6, 3.1.1 and 3.2.1 versions  
> would
> all still require Java 1.5.[/example]
>
> This is not a requirement that 3rd party plugins need use Java 6 as a
> minimum. Third party plugins are free to require any Java version >= the
> corresponding Maven minimum requirement, though obviously from a users
> perspective it is best if plugins try to adhere to our contracts for
> corresponding versions of Maven Core.
>
> Justification for the cut-off date:
>
> * Oracle has gone end of life on Java 6 Feb 2013 (note that there is  
> still
> extended and sustaining support for existing Oracle customers using Java  
> 5)
> * IBM will go end of life for z/OS on 30th Sep 2013 (other platforms are
> still with support, but there are other Java vendors for other platforms)
> * Apple no longer supports any hardware that does not have at least an
> Apple Java 6 version available.
> * Red Hat is providing support for OpenJDK 6
> * HP-UX, OpenVMS, and Tru64 all have a Java 6 implementation available.
>
> As I see it, that essentially ensures that for the vast majority of
> platforms there is a very strong likelihood of a Java 6 compatible  
> version
> of Java available for that platform. Toolchains support or forking of the
> compiler and surefire can provide support for users who still need to  
> build
> with older versions of Java (e.g., as was the case for Java 1.4.2 with
> Maven 2.2.1). Additionally users who are forced to use a java version  
> older
> than Java 6 also are likely unable to upgrade their version of Maven, so
> this change will not affect them
>
> This vote is open for 72 hours. A minimum of three +1 binding votes (i.e.
> from the PMC) and the majority of votes cast from committers will be
> required to pass this vote.
>
> +1000: Yes, and when can we have the vote to go for Java 7 as a minimum?
> (This option is equivalent to +1 but provides people the ability to
> indicate an additional preference while not contributing to the  
> inevitible
> noise)
> +1: Yes
> 0: No opinion
> -1: No
>
> -Stephen

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

12