> On 18.05.2018 14:34, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 08:22:46AM -0400, James McCoy wrote:
>>> On Fri, May 18, 2018 at 09:46:41AM +0200, Stefan Sperling wrote:
>>>> Elsewhere in this discussion thread it was suggested to raise the
>>>> minimum JDK version requirement to Java 1.8.
>>>> Your statement "please keep backward compatibility with older JDKs"
>>>> could mean anything between "please leave everything as it is now" to
>>>> "bumping the minimum requirement to Java 1.8 is absolutely fine with me".
>>>> This requirement would be introduced for Subversion 1.11.
>>>> Can you explain which versions of OS X / JDK you expect to support when
>>>> Subversion 1.11 will be released in probably 2 to 3 years from now?
>>> No one would be able to build the stable release of Subversion with JDK
>>> 10 for 2 to 3 years?
>>> Supporting both pre-8 and post-8 JDKs wouldn't be trivial. I've been
>>> working under the assumption that we can bump up to JDK 8 and backport
>>> that change to 1.10.
>>> If that's not going to be the case, should my current work still go to
>>> trunk? Then someone can find the time to adapt things to also work with
>>> pre-8 JDK?
>> I think you should aim to proceed with your plan as it was.
>> If anyone has strong objections to this, they should be constructive and
>> try to provide an alternative solution without pushing an additional
>> burden on you.
> Given that Java 6 and 7 are obsolete ... I think it won't hurt to make
> Java 8 the oldest supported version on the 1.10.x branch.
I don't share this opinion as a Java developer and Maven PMC for several
1. I would expect a baseline raise decision for a Subversion branch to
be announced in advance. The issue was brought up in 2017-12. No one
2. None of the code uses any Java 8 features, there is no compelling
reason to raise, just because javah has been replaced.
3. Java 6 and 7 are available from other vendors for free or for paid
for still sometime, regardless of Java 8.
4. Enterprise people tend to freeze stuff for years (which I personally
don't like, but that is another story).
5. We, Maven developers, try to keep the baseline very low to give a
broader community to possibility to use our code as long as possible.
Recently a proposal was made to raise the Maven baseline to Java 8, I
immediately objected because unless someone will make use of Java 8
features, this is going to be pointless. We haven't even embraced NIO2.
Upshot: I'd expect Subversion 1.11 to require Java 8 (or Java 11 if this
will be available on tier 2 and 3 platforms too) for tooling reasons,
but nothing for below.
Received on 2018-05-20 12:47:48 CEST