commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>
Subject Re: [LOGGING] Logging and Java 9 (Was: Re: Compiler targets and Java 9)
Date Tue, 06 Jun 2017 13:53:45 GMT
The latest discussions I read indicated that adding the automatic module entry to the manifest
is NOT recommended unless the component is ready to be modularized except that it has downstream
dependencies that are not modules.  

Ralph

> On Jun 6, 2017, at 5:18 AM, Jörg Schaible <joerg.schaible@bpm-inspire.com> wrote:
> 
> Hi Benedict,
> 
> Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> 
>> (Moving this to a new topic, since it may cause a lengthy discussion :o))
>> 
>>> Am 05.06.2017 um 16:41 schrieb Jochen Wiedmann
>>> <jochen.wiedmann@gmail.com>:
>>> 
>>> Hi,
>>> 
>>> thanks to Rob Rompkins, and his recent work on Fileupload, it came to
>>> my attention that Java 9 will no longer support JVM 1.5, and lower, as
>>> a compiler target. [1]
>>> 
>>> This means, that we will be preventing our developers from using Java
>>> 9, if a component is still below 1.6. (And, I'd expect that to be the
>>> case for quite some projects.)
>>> 
>>> Now, leaving the general discussions regarding Java 9, and (in
>>> particular) Jigsaw, aside, I think that is something that we ought to
>>> consider.
>>> 
>>> OTOH, it seems reasonable to expect that Java 9 adoption will be slow,
>>> given that it isn't upwards compatible.
>>> 
>>> So, as a  compromise, I propose that we adopt the following policy:
>>> 
>>> All commons proper components are expected within one year from now on
>>> to bump their compiler target to 1.6, or beyond, and have a release
>>> published with that target. That way, we know, that it works fine with
>>> the Java 9 compiler.
>> 
>> What about Logging? Logging is at Java 1.3 at the moment and we decided,
>> that we don’t want to touch that component since it is so widely spread. I
>> think our advice last time was to refer new users to use Log4j.
>> 
>> Do we apply the proposed policy to Logging nevertheless?
> 
> I'd be pragmatic. If laster CL runs in Java 9, then there's no action 
> required. If not, we may apply the policy for the mext minor version (and 
> also add a module name). A productive environment not running at least Java 
> 6 won't have to use this anyway.
> 
> - Jörg
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org <mailto:dev-help@commons.apache.org>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message