[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10578?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17538749#comment-17538749
]
Robert Muir commented on LUCENE-10578:
--------------------------------------
1. fail, there is only fail. warnings are useless.
2. see
https://docs.oracle.com/javase/9/docs/api/java/lang/Runtime.Version.html. if
vendor wants special numbers they have to use 4th and later components but
major/minor/patch is standardized. so we can do the check safely based solely
on numbers.
3. ideally bump it when we upgrade jenkins? Or at least from time to time.
Majority of computers have java auto-upgrading and are up to date. Too many
companies view It is a security risk any other way. Such a check won't be
onerous or annoying, just helpful, as it only applies to the rare people who
downloaded tarballs and have a security landmine still on their machine :)
> Make minimum required Java version for build more specific
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: LUCENE-10578
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-10578
> Project: Lucene - Core
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Tomoko Uchida
> Priority: Minor
>
> See this mail thread for background:
> [https://lists.apache.org/thread/6md5k94pqdkkwg0f66hor2sonm2t77jo]
> To prevent developers (especially, release managers) from using too old java
> versions, we could (should?) elaborate the minimum required java versions for
> the build.
> Possible questions in my mind:
> * should we stop the build with an error or emit a warning and continue?
> * do minor versions depend on the vendor? if yes, should we also specify the
> vendor?
> * how do we determine/maintain the minimum version?
>
>
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.7#820007)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: issues-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: issues-h...@lucene.apache.org
