uima-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marshall Schor <...@schor.com>
Subject Re: Jenkins, we have a problem - with Java 5
Date Mon, 02 Sep 2013 15:49:10 GMT

On 9/2/2013 9:55 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
> On 02.09.2013 15:49, Marshall Schor wrote:
>> On 9/2/2013 8:56 AM, Peter Klügl wrote:
>>> So... just to pick up the result of the discussion:
>>>
>>> We will probably switch all modules to a newer Java version next year
>>> and the upcoming ruta release should still be based on Java 5, right?
>> Sorry, I don't quite understand what you mean.  If you mean, you will do your
>> development using Java 6 or 7, but not use any of their new classes/methods,
>> sticking to just Java 5 ones, so the release will still be OK on Java 5, keeping
>> the
>> maven source/target compliance level set to 5, then that's OK.
> Yes, I will not include Java 6 stuff until all modules change their
> prerequisite next year.
>
> The question targeted the fact that ruta should not require Java 6 in
> the next release, but should still stick to Java 5.
>
>> For the Eclipse workbench part, does the lowest version of Eclipse you are
>> targeting have a Java version level prerequisite?
> Not that I know of.
I guess Eclipse still runs on Java 5...  (maybe even 4?)

-Marshall
>
> Peter
>
>> -Marshall
>>> Best,
>>>
>>> Peter
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 29.07.2013 15:29, Marshall Schor wrote:
>>>> Clarifying:
>>>>
>>>> I develop in Java 7 :-).  I was depending on our Jenkins runs to point out
>>>> anthing that "snuck" into the build that had dependencies on Java 6 or 7.
>>>>
>>>> The downside for changing the prerequisite to Java 7 would be that there
might
>>>> be some customers of UIMA who are currently running it on Java 6, just fine,
in
>>>> deployments, who, when they upgraded to the next level of UIMA, would find
it
>>>> necessary to upgrade to Java 7. 
>>>>
>>>> I'm aware of at least one major corporation that uses UIMA inside products
it
>>>> ships, that is on Java 1.6 (although, I suspect they will be moving to Java
7 at
>>>> some point in the future, of course).
>>>>
>>>> So, it's a matter of potentially "forcing" customers to upgrade to Java 7.
>>>>
>>>> I'm not sure this is a real issue, with customers, which is why I've asked
on
>>>> the users list.
>>>>
>>>> If we get a sense that Java 7 is fine with all customers who are upgrading,
then
>>>> I'm fine with switching to 7; maybe that's the right target, if we advertise
and
>>>> set the switch date for mid-next-year.
>>>>
>>>> -Marshall
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 7/29/2013 6:09 AM, Jörn Kottmann wrote:
>>>>> On 07/28/2013 06:15 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
>>>>>> If that's the case, then probably a good idea is to publicize the
upcoming
>>>>>> switch with a quite long lead time, so that users get an ample chance
to prepare
>>>>>> and/or raise concerns.
>>>>> If we do such an investigation we should also check what impact a switch
to
>>>>> Java 7 would have.
>>>>> Maybe we can directly switch to Java 7?
>>>>>
>>>>> Jörn
>>>>>
>


Mime
View raw message