commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Benson <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Can the next version major version of a project require Java6? (i.e. drop Java 1.5)
Date Mon, 05 Dec 2011 19:22:21 GMT
I think all that Sebastian is saying is something like "if you can
create your new, cool API and the only things you really miss from
Java 6 are @Override on interface implementation methods and
ServiceLoader, for example, maybe it's worth that tiny bit of extra
pain to reach that slightly larger audience."  We all feel frustrated
from time to time working in the community setting; I've been there
myself, but I don't think Seb is just trying to be a killjoy just for
the hell of it.


On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 1:13 PM, Christian Grobmeier <> wrote:
> On Mon, Dec 5, 2011 at 7:38 PM, sebb <> wrote:
>> On 5 December 2011 18:10, henrib <> wrote:
>>> sebb-2-2 wrote
>>>> My view is that while there is still a need for software to be able to
>>>> run on Java 1.5, we should not insist on requiring a minimum of
>>>> 1.6.*unless* there is good technical reason for doing so.
>>> But you don't consider a good (technical) reason the fact that the
>>> contributor can not/does not want to incur the cost of maintaining a JDK 1.5
>>> on its dev platforms to be able to contribute to newer versions...
>> No, I don't consider that a valid reason on its own.
> Committing should be fun. If one does not want to support JDK 1.5 he
> goes away. Henri seems as he does not want and would like to put
> effort in a more modern environment. In addition, how many people can
> you attract with a JDK 1.5 version to contribute? For me this is valid
> reason.
>>> And no-one is stating that Java 1.5 is not in used in production somewhere;
>>> but IMHO, these are not the ones that will be JEXL3 users, especially since
>>> they have 2.1 (soon).
>>> Anyway and beyond the point, my advice to 1.5 users is that before trying to
>>> use "new" versions of libraries, migrating away from an unsupported/EOLed
>>> platform should be their priority.
>> Indeed, ideally everyone would now be using Java 6 and Windows users
>> should all upgrade to Windows 7 etc.
>> But that is a separate issue.
> No it is not.
> It seems you ignore my idea on having jexl2 in maintenance mode, but
> this is actually what MS did with Win XP. Now they don't support it. I
> ask myself, why do we need to support outdated jdks until all
> committers are gone away or the library is the outdated people get
> some fresher stuff (Collections vs Guava)?
> If Henri is the opinion that people should use jdk6 he should be
> allowed to create such a version and call it Jexl3.
> If you want to keep a jdk5 version, you are of course allowed to
> support that one.
> Cheers
> Christian
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> --
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message