Actually the main reason I brought it up was that we currently cannot guarantee inter-operability with Java 6 any longer. If I look at our CI tests, very few of the tests that actually run against Java 6 environments pass.
This page should give a clearer indication of that problem: https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/DeltaSpike/job/DeltaSpike%20for%20CDI%201.0/ John On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:12 AM Cody Lerum <[email protected]> wrote: > At this point it seems the main driver for dropping Java6 is to > discourage its use. I think there is sufficient discouragement > elsewhere and anyone with active or new projects is working towards or > planning for Java7/8. > > +1 for keeping Java6 until the next major bump. > > On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 7:25 AM, Mark Struberg <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Agree, we don't gain much with moving to Java7. > > > > Thus I'd say that we keep Java6/CDI-1.0 and have the next major version > bump (aka DeltaSpike-2.x) targeting Java8 and CDI-2.0. But of course keep a > ds-1.x maintenance branch even after that for a while. > > > > > > LieGrue, > > strub > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Thursday, 7 April 2016, 14:42, Gerhard Petracek < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> > as mentioned in the initial discussion i also don't see a real > benefit for > >> us as a community (to drop the java 6 support at this point). > >> in the end ds targets ee6 + supports ee7 servers (including optional > >> features). > >> ee6 isn't bound to java 6 technically, however, e.g. some vendors > require > >> it... > >> > >> regards, > >> gerhard > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> 2016-04-07 13:18 GMT+02:00 Rooda, William (John.) <[email protected]>: > >> > >>> Ford has an internal “shared farm” of servers that our applications > can > >>> use. The shared farm is Websphere Application Server 8.0.0.x. This > only > >>> has Java6 available. While some teams go out and spend the money to > >>> procure their own servers outside of the shared farm, this is > prohibitively > >>> expensive without a powerful use case. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Our Java applications won't have a server offering in our internal > >> shared > >>> farm for Java 7 until 4Q2016 or 1Q2017 at the earliest. We plan on > >>> developing almost all applications against Java6 until that time, and > >>> unfortunately we have to re-evaluate continuing to use at an > enterprise > >>> level any open source software that no longer patches and supports > Java6 > >>> due to the risk it introduces to our applications. We understand that > this > >>> makes us an outlier in the community of DeltaSpike users. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> ~john > >>> > >>> > >>> From: John D. Ament [mailto:[email protected]] > >>> Sent: Thursday, April 07, 2016 7:13 AM > >>> To: [email protected]; [email protected] > >>> Cc: Rooda, William (John.); Shvartsman, Oleg (O.I.); Hall, Todd (T.B.) > >>> Subject: Re: Cutting over to Java 7 > >>> > >>> Hi Marvin, > >>> > >>> Thanks for the input. You can find our discussion/vote thread from > last > >>> month here: > >>> > >> > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/deltaspike-dev/201603.mbox/%3CCAOqetn_vo69sx-yQjLt%3DQpfdRXgXVqu7NiobanLgXKOOr6Co0Q%40mail.gmail.com%3E > >>> > >>> The curious thing about your note - the WebSphere version I've seen > the > >>> Ford team mention a few times requires Java 7. In general, EE 7 > systems > >>> were built for Java 7 support (JMS made use of autocloseable is one I > can > >>> think of off the top of my head). > >>> > >>> As mentioned, there's still a plan to support the 1.6.x line. If you > >> guys > >>> find any issues that you need to stay on 1.6.x, please feel free to > raise > >>> them and we can address as additional 1.6.x patches. > >>> > >>> John > >>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 6:42 AM Marvin Toll <[email protected] > >>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > >>> A data point: Ford Motor Company is on Java 6. Given our portfolio of > >>> 4,000 applications (a subset of which are Java) - it is difficult to > know > >>> how long a migration to Java 7 will take. It was scheduled to begin > in > >>> calendar year 2016 - the current "begin" target is 2017. > >>> > >>> _Marvin > >>> > >>> -----Original Message----- > >>> From: John D. Ament [mailto:[email protected]<mailto: > >>> [email protected]>] > >>> Sent: Wednesday, April 6, 2016 10:14 PM > >>> To: deltaspike > >> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected] > >>> >> > >>> Subject: Cutting over to Java 7 > >>> > >>> All, > >>> > >>> I wanted to get opinions for how to cut over to Java 7. > >>> > >>> There's two ways I've done similar cut overs in the past, wanted to > >> share > >>> them and build out some ideas. > >>> > >>> 1. Continue maintenance on 1.6 for x months. When we decide that > we're > >>> going to cut a 1.7 we do the switch then. > >>> > >>> 2. Decide now that the next release is going to be planned as 1.7. > If we > >>> need to do maintenance on 1.6 we branch from the tag and merge back > in when > >>> done. > >>> > >>> The former is safer, but will take longer. The last minor release > had the > >>> most patch releases on it, 4. The latter is more practical and shows > >>> implementation much quicker. It creates a bit more overhead as we'd > >> need > >>> to merge branches. In the 4.5 years of deltaspike, we haven't had to > >> do it > >>> thus yet. I suspect that given our user base, #2 would be acceptable > since > >>> most everyone's using Java 7+, so it seems a small chance that we'd > >> run > >>> into a JVM difference. I'm not sure if others have different ideas to > >>> throw out. > >>> > >>> John > >>> > >> >
