Quantcast

Minimum Java runtime version for proposed upcoming Ivy release

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
9 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Minimum Java runtime version for proposed upcoming Ivy release

J Pai
Now that the plan seems to be to release 2.5.x of Ivy, would it be fine if we mandate the _minimum_ Java runtime version to be something higher than Java 5 that’s currently supported for 2.4.x http://ant.apache.org/ivy/history/latest-milestone/compatibility.html.

Given that Java 6 itself has long been EOLed, I’m not sure whether we should consider that as minimum supported version or something higher. Any thoughts?

Things will be a bit more easy to develop and test once we finalize on the Java version.

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Minimum Java runtime version for proposed upcoming Ivy release

Nicolas Lalevée
I think that upgrading the requirement on the JDK is a good idea, because at least us, the maintainers, need at some point to be able to test it if there is an issue with that minimum JDK.

One thing to consider is which JDK is being required in the environment Ivy is being used: Ant, Gradle, SBT, Eclipse, Intellij… We shouldn’t require too high.

Nicolas

> Le 18 mai 2017 à 10:58, J Pai <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>
> Now that the plan seems to be to release 2.5.x of Ivy, would it be fine if we mandate the _minimum_ Java runtime version to be something higher than Java 5 that’s currently supported for 2.4.x http://ant.apache.org/ivy/history/latest-milestone/compatibility.html.
>
> Given that Java 6 itself has long been EOLed, I’m not sure whether we should consider that as minimum supported version or something higher. Any thoughts?
>
> Things will be a bit more easy to develop and test once we finalize on the Java version.
>
> -Jaikiran
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Minimum Java runtime version for proposed upcoming Ivy release

Paul King
The current version of Groovy has 1.6 as the minimum but is our maintenance
stream.
The upcoming next version will require 1.7 and versions with 1.8 as the
minimum are not too far away.

Ant 1.9.x is still on Java5 but Ant 1.10.x requires Java 8.

I don't think Gradle uses any Ivy classes any more.

I'd recommend 1.7 since most active projects will be releasing on 1.7/1.8
and then after a release, if all goes well activity-wise, I'd then bump the
Ivy version and target 8.

Cheers, Paul.


On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 7:14 PM, Nicolas Lalevée <[hidden email]
> wrote:

> I think that upgrading the requirement on the JDK is a good idea, because
> at least us, the maintainers, need at some point to be able to test it if
> there is an issue with that minimum JDK.
>
> One thing to consider is which JDK is being required in the environment
> Ivy is being used: Ant, Gradle, SBT, Eclipse, Intellij… We shouldn’t
> require too high.
>
> Nicolas
>
> > Le 18 mai 2017 à 10:58, J Pai <[hidden email]> a écrit :
> >
> > Now that the plan seems to be to release 2.5.x of Ivy, would it be fine
> if we mandate the _minimum_ Java runtime version to be something higher
> than Java 5 that’s currently supported for 2.4.x
> http://ant.apache.org/ivy/history/latest-milestone/compatibility.html.
> >
> > Given that Java 6 itself has long been EOLed, I’m not sure whether we
> should consider that as minimum supported version or something higher. Any
> thoughts?
> >
> > Things will be a bit more easy to develop and test once we finalize on
> the Java version.
> >
> > -Jaikiran
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

AW: Minimum Java runtime version for proposed upcoming Ivy release

Jan Matèrne (jhm)
I would favour 1.7 as it's the newest before the major update to Java8.
Having a 1.7 in the target environment should not been so restrictive ...

Jan

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Paul King [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 18. Mai 2017 11:27
> An: Ant Developers List
> Betreff: Re: Minimum Java runtime version for proposed upcoming Ivy
> release
>
> The current version of Groovy has 1.6 as the minimum but is our
> maintenance stream.
> The upcoming next version will require 1.7 and versions with 1.8 as the
> minimum are not too far away.
>
> Ant 1.9.x is still on Java5 but Ant 1.10.x requires Java 8.
>
> I don't think Gradle uses any Ivy classes any more.
>
> I'd recommend 1.7 since most active projects will be releasing on
> 1.7/1.8 and then after a release, if all goes well activity-wise, I'd
> then bump the Ivy version and target 8.
>
> Cheers, Paul.
>
>
> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 7:14 PM, Nicolas Lalevée
> <[hidden email]
> > wrote:
>
> > I think that upgrading the requirement on the JDK is a good idea,
> > because at least us, the maintainers, need at some point to be able
> to
> > test it if there is an issue with that minimum JDK.
> >
> > One thing to consider is which JDK is being required in the
> > environment Ivy is being used: Ant, Gradle, SBT, Eclipse, Intellij…
> We
> > shouldn’t require too high.
> >
> > Nicolas
> >
> > > Le 18 mai 2017 à 10:58, J Pai <[hidden email]> a écrit :
> > >
> > > Now that the plan seems to be to release 2.5.x of Ivy, would it be
> > > fine
> > if we mandate the _minimum_ Java runtime version to be something
> > higher than Java 5 that’s currently supported for 2.4.x
> > http://ant.apache.org/ivy/history/latest-
> milestone/compatibility.html.
> > >
> > > Given that Java 6 itself has long been EOLed, I’m not sure whether
> > > we
> > should consider that as minimum supported version or something
> higher.
> > Any thoughts?
> > >
> > > Things will be a bit more easy to develop and test once we finalize
> > > on
> > the Java version.
> > >
> > > -Jaikiran
> > > -------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
> > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] For
> > > additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] For additional
> > commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >


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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Minimum Java runtime version for proposed upcoming Ivy release

J Pai
+1

-Jaikiran
On 18-May-2017, at 4:26 PM, Jan Matèrne (jhm) <[hidden email]> wrote:

I would favour 1.7 as it's the newest before the major update to Java8.
Having a 1.7 in the target environment should not been so restrictive ...

Jan

> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> Von: Paul King [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 18. Mai 2017 11:27
> An: Ant Developers List
> Betreff: Re: Minimum Java runtime version for proposed upcoming Ivy
> release
>
> The current version of Groovy has 1.6 as the minimum but is our
> maintenance stream.
> The upcoming next version will require 1.7 and versions with 1.8 as the
> minimum are not too far away.
>
> Ant 1.9.x is still on Java5 but Ant 1.10.x requires Java 8.
>
> I don't think Gradle uses any Ivy classes any more.
>
> I'd recommend 1.7 since most active projects will be releasing on
> 1.7/1.8 and then after a release, if all goes well activity-wise, I'd
> then bump the Ivy version and target 8.
>
> Cheers, Paul.
>
>
> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 7:14 PM, Nicolas Lalevée
> <[hidden email]
>> wrote:
>
>> I think that upgrading the requirement on the JDK is a good idea,
>> because at least us, the maintainers, need at some point to be able
> to
>> test it if there is an issue with that minimum JDK.
>>
>> One thing to consider is which JDK is being required in the
>> environment Ivy is being used: Ant, Gradle, SBT, Eclipse, Intellij…
> We
>> shouldn’t require too high.
>>
>> Nicolas
>>
>>> Le 18 mai 2017 à 10:58, J Pai <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>>>
>>> Now that the plan seems to be to release 2.5.x of Ivy, would it be
>>> fine
>> if we mandate the _minimum_ Java runtime version to be something
>> higher than Java 5 that’s currently supported for 2.4.x
>> http://ant.apache.org/ivy/history/latest-
> milestone/compatibility.html.
>>>
>>> Given that Java 6 itself has long been EOLed, I’m not sure whether
>>> we
>> should consider that as minimum supported version or something
> higher.
>> Any thoughts?
>>>
>>> Things will be a bit more easy to develop and test once we finalize
>>> on
>> the Java version.
>>>
>>> -Jaikiran
>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> -
>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] For
>>> additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] For additional
>> commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>>


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



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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Minimum Java runtime version for proposed upcoming Ivy release

Matt Sicker
Using 1.7 for the next release and then 1.8 for the following release makes
sense to me.

On 18 May 2017 at 05:58, J Pai <[hidden email]> wrote:

> +1
>
> -Jaikiran
> On 18-May-2017, at 4:26 PM, Jan Matèrne (jhm) <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> I would favour 1.7 as it's the newest before the major update to Java8.
> Having a 1.7 in the target environment should not been so restrictive ...
>
> Jan
>
> > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > Von: Paul King [mailto:[hidden email]]
> > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 18. Mai 2017 11:27
> > An: Ant Developers List
> > Betreff: Re: Minimum Java runtime version for proposed upcoming Ivy
> > release
> >
> > The current version of Groovy has 1.6 as the minimum but is our
> > maintenance stream.
> > The upcoming next version will require 1.7 and versions with 1.8 as the
> > minimum are not too far away.
> >
> > Ant 1.9.x is still on Java5 but Ant 1.10.x requires Java 8.
> >
> > I don't think Gradle uses any Ivy classes any more.
> >
> > I'd recommend 1.7 since most active projects will be releasing on
> > 1.7/1.8 and then after a release, if all goes well activity-wise, I'd
> > then bump the Ivy version and target 8.
> >
> > Cheers, Paul.
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 7:14 PM, Nicolas Lalevée
> > <[hidden email]
> >> wrote:
> >
> >> I think that upgrading the requirement on the JDK is a good idea,
> >> because at least us, the maintainers, need at some point to be able
> > to
> >> test it if there is an issue with that minimum JDK.
> >>
> >> One thing to consider is which JDK is being required in the
> >> environment Ivy is being used: Ant, Gradle, SBT, Eclipse, Intellij…
> > We
> >> shouldn’t require too high.
> >>
> >> Nicolas
> >>
> >>> Le 18 mai 2017 à 10:58, J Pai <[hidden email]> a écrit :
> >>>
> >>> Now that the plan seems to be to release 2.5.x of Ivy, would it be
> >>> fine
> >> if we mandate the _minimum_ Java runtime version to be something
> >> higher than Java 5 that’s currently supported for 2.4.x
> >> http://ant.apache.org/ivy/history/latest-
> > milestone/compatibility.html.
> >>>
> >>> Given that Java 6 itself has long been EOLed, I’m not sure whether
> >>> we
> >> should consider that as minimum supported version or something
> > higher.
> >> Any thoughts?
> >>>
> >>> Things will be a bit more easy to develop and test once we finalize
> >>> on
> >> the Java version.
> >>>
> >>> -Jaikiran
> >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> > -
> >>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] For
> >>> additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] For additional
> >> commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >>
> >>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>


--
Matt Sicker <[hidden email]>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Minimum Java runtime version for proposed upcoming Ivy release

Gintautas Grigelionis
That's fine, IvyDE is already at Java 7/Eclipse 3.7.1; then IvyDE baseline
should be bumped to Java 8/Eclipse 4.4 with the next Ivy release. Hopefully
updatesite resolver could be used then.

2017-05-18 17:12 GMT+02:00 Matt Sicker <[hidden email]>:

> Using 1.7 for the next release and then 1.8 for the following release makes
> sense to me.
>
> On 18 May 2017 at 05:58, J Pai <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > -Jaikiran
> > On 18-May-2017, at 4:26 PM, Jan Matèrne (jhm) <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > I would favour 1.7 as it's the newest before the major update to Java8.
> > Having a 1.7 in the target environment should not been so restrictive ...
> >
> > Jan
> >
> > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
> > > Von: Paul King [mailto:[hidden email]]
> > > Gesendet: Donnerstag, 18. Mai 2017 11:27
> > > An: Ant Developers List
> > > Betreff: Re: Minimum Java runtime version for proposed upcoming Ivy
> > > release
> > >
> > > The current version of Groovy has 1.6 as the minimum but is our
> > > maintenance stream.
> > > The upcoming next version will require 1.7 and versions with 1.8 as the
> > > minimum are not too far away.
> > >
> > > Ant 1.9.x is still on Java5 but Ant 1.10.x requires Java 8.
> > >
> > > I don't think Gradle uses any Ivy classes any more.
> > >
> > > I'd recommend 1.7 since most active projects will be releasing on
> > > 1.7/1.8 and then after a release, if all goes well activity-wise, I'd
> > > then bump the Ivy version and target 8.
> > >
> > > Cheers, Paul.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 7:14 PM, Nicolas Lalevée
> > > <[hidden email]
> > >> wrote:
> > >
> > >> I think that upgrading the requirement on the JDK is a good idea,
> > >> because at least us, the maintainers, need at some point to be able
> > > to
> > >> test it if there is an issue with that minimum JDK.
> > >>
> > >> One thing to consider is which JDK is being required in the
> > >> environment Ivy is being used: Ant, Gradle, SBT, Eclipse, Intellij…
> > > We
> > >> shouldn’t require too high.
> > >>
> > >> Nicolas
> > >>
> > >>> Le 18 mai 2017 à 10:58, J Pai <[hidden email]> a écrit :
> > >>>
> > >>> Now that the plan seems to be to release 2.5.x of Ivy, would it be
> > >>> fine
> > >> if we mandate the _minimum_ Java runtime version to be something
> > >> higher than Java 5 that’s currently supported for 2.4.x
> > >> http://ant.apache.org/ivy/history/latest-
> > > milestone/compatibility.html.
> > >>>
> > >>> Given that Java 6 itself has long been EOLed, I’m not sure whether
> > >>> we
> > >> should consider that as minimum supported version or something
> > > higher.
> > >> Any thoughts?
> > >>>
> > >>> Things will be a bit more easy to develop and test once we finalize
> > >>> on
> > >> the Java version.
> > >>>
> > >>> -Jaikiran
> > >>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > -
> > >>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] For
> > >>> additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] For additional
> > >> commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <[hidden email]>
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Minimum Java runtime version for proposed upcoming Ivy release

Gintautas Grigelionis
In reply to this post by Paul King
Gradle does have an Ivy plugin which wraps Ivy 2.2.0

2017-05-18 11:26 GMT+02:00 Paul King <[hidden email]>:

> The current version of Groovy has 1.6 as the minimum but is our maintenance
> stream.
> The upcoming next version will require 1.7 and versions with 1.8 as the
> minimum are not too far away.
>
> Ant 1.9.x is still on Java5 but Ant 1.10.x requires Java 8.
>
> I don't think Gradle uses any Ivy classes any more.
>
> I'd recommend 1.7 since most active projects will be releasing on 1.7/1.8
> and then after a release, if all goes well activity-wise, I'd then bump the
> Ivy version and target 8.
>
> Cheers, Paul.
>
>
> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 7:14 PM, Nicolas Lalevée <
> [hidden email]
> > wrote:
>
> > I think that upgrading the requirement on the JDK is a good idea, because
> > at least us, the maintainers, need at some point to be able to test it if
> > there is an issue with that minimum JDK.
> >
> > One thing to consider is which JDK is being required in the environment
> > Ivy is being used: Ant, Gradle, SBT, Eclipse, Intellij… We shouldn’t
> > require too high.
> >
> > Nicolas
> >
> > > Le 18 mai 2017 à 10:58, J Pai <[hidden email]> a écrit :
> > >
> > > Now that the plan seems to be to release 2.5.x of Ivy, would it be fine
> > if we mandate the _minimum_ Java runtime version to be something higher
> > than Java 5 that’s currently supported for 2.4.x
> > http://ant.apache.org/ivy/history/latest-milestone/compatibility.html.
> > >
> > > Given that Java 6 itself has long been EOLed, I’m not sure whether we
> > should consider that as minimum supported version or something higher.
> Any
> > thoughts?
> > >
> > > Things will be a bit more easy to develop and test once we finalize on
> > the Java version.
> > >
> > > -Jaikiran
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
> >
>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|  
Report Content as Inappropriate

Re: Minimum Java runtime version for proposed upcoming Ivy release

J Pai
In reply to this post by Gintautas Grigelionis
So far the majority seems to be to require a minimum of Java 7. If there are no concerns or objections to this by the end of this week, then on Monday, I’ll raise a PR to mandate Java 7 for Ivy.

-Jaikiran


On 18-May-2017, at 11:48 PM, Gintautas Grigelionis <[hidden email]> wrote:

That's fine, IvyDE is already at Java 7/Eclipse 3.7.1; then IvyDE baseline
should be bumped to Java 8/Eclipse 4.4 with the next Ivy release. Hopefully
updatesite resolver could be used then.

2017-05-18 17:12 GMT+02:00 Matt Sicker <[hidden email]>:

> Using 1.7 for the next release and then 1.8 for the following release makes
> sense to me.
>
> On 18 May 2017 at 05:58, J Pai <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> -Jaikiran
>> On 18-May-2017, at 4:26 PM, Jan Matèrne (jhm) <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> I would favour 1.7 as it's the newest before the major update to Java8.
>> Having a 1.7 in the target environment should not been so restrictive ...
>>
>> Jan
>>
>>> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
>>> Von: Paul King [mailto:[hidden email]]
>>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 18. Mai 2017 11:27
>>> An: Ant Developers List
>>> Betreff: Re: Minimum Java runtime version for proposed upcoming Ivy
>>> release
>>>
>>> The current version of Groovy has 1.6 as the minimum but is our
>>> maintenance stream.
>>> The upcoming next version will require 1.7 and versions with 1.8 as the
>>> minimum are not too far away.
>>>
>>> Ant 1.9.x is still on Java5 but Ant 1.10.x requires Java 8.
>>>
>>> I don't think Gradle uses any Ivy classes any more.
>>>
>>> I'd recommend 1.7 since most active projects will be releasing on
>>> 1.7/1.8 and then after a release, if all goes well activity-wise, I'd
>>> then bump the Ivy version and target 8.
>>>
>>> Cheers, Paul.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 7:14 PM, Nicolas Lalevée
>>> <[hidden email]
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think that upgrading the requirement on the JDK is a good idea,
>>>> because at least us, the maintainers, need at some point to be able
>>> to
>>>> test it if there is an issue with that minimum JDK.
>>>>
>>>> One thing to consider is which JDK is being required in the
>>>> environment Ivy is being used: Ant, Gradle, SBT, Eclipse, Intellij…
>>> We
>>>> shouldn’t require too high.
>>>>
>>>> Nicolas
>>>>
>>>>> Le 18 mai 2017 à 10:58, J Pai <[hidden email]> a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>> Now that the plan seems to be to release 2.5.x of Ivy, would it be
>>>>> fine
>>>> if we mandate the _minimum_ Java runtime version to be something
>>>> higher than Java 5 that’s currently supported for 2.4.x
>>>> http://ant.apache.org/ivy/history/latest-
>>> milestone/compatibility.html.
>>>>>
>>>>> Given that Java 6 itself has long been EOLed, I’m not sure whether
>>>>> we
>>>> should consider that as minimum supported version or something
>>> higher.
>>>> Any thoughts?
>>>>>
>>>>> Things will be a bit more easy to develop and test once we finalize
>>>>> on
>>>> the Java version.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Jaikiran
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> -
>>>>> - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] For
>>>>> additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] For additional
>>>> commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <[hidden email]>
>


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

Loading...