Re: Should Log4j API bridges have a 3.x release?
> On May 30, 2024, at 6:37 AM, Engebretson, John > wrote: > > On 2024/04/10 01:45:19 Ralph Goers wrote: >> >> >>> On Apr 9, 2024, at 3:52 PM, Piotr P. Karwasz wrote: >>> >>> >>> BTW: Maybe SLF4J still uses Java 8, but the latest Logback uses Java 11. >> >> Ask me if I care about Logback. ;-) >> >> Ralph > > > > Following up on this chain re: JDK 8 vs. 17 – code compiled against JDK 8 > should run the same as that code compiled against JDK 17. Language features > are clearly limited to JDK 8 but that doesn’t appear to be an immediate issue. > > So, other than enabling new features, what is the driver for targeting JDK > 17? > > John For 3.x? Maintenance is simpler for one. The more JDKs we support the more I have to have installed on my laptop. It also does make it simpler to take advantage of and support new language features. Remember that most of us have $dayjobs. Over 90% of the apps I support at work have moved off of JDK 8. Most are on JDK 11 but some have moved up to JDK 17. To be honest, all are apps would be there if moving to Spring 3.x wasn’t so hard. Ralph
Re: Should Log4j API bridges have a 3.x release?
I agree on the complexity argument - and FWIW we still have many apps on JDK 8 and are intimidated by the Spring upgrade, so I understand that. :) Sounds like we agree there's no runtime impact? John On Thu, May 30, 2024 at 9:31 AM Ralph Goers wrote: > > > > On May 30, 2024, at 6:37 AM, Engebretson, John > wrote: > > > > On 2024/04/10 01:45:19 Ralph Goers wrote: > >> > >> > >>> On Apr 9, 2024, at 3:52 PM, Piotr P. Karwasz wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> BTW: Maybe SLF4J still uses Java 8, but the latest Logback uses Java > 11. > >> > >> Ask me if I care about Logback. ;-) > >> > >> Ralph > > > > > > > > Following up on this chain re: JDK 8 vs. 17 – code compiled against JDK > 8 should run the same as that code compiled against JDK 17. Language > features are clearly limited to JDK 8 but that doesn’t appear to be an > immediate issue. > > > > So, other than enabling new features, what is the driver for targeting > JDK 17? > > > > John > > For 3.x? Maintenance is simpler for one. The more JDKs we support the > more I have to have installed on my laptop. It also does make it simpler to > take advantage of and support new language features. > > Remember that most of us have $dayjobs. Over 90% of the apps I support at > work have moved off of JDK 8. Most are on JDK 11 but some have moved up to > JDK 17. To be honest, all are apps would be there if moving to Spring 3.x > wasn’t so hard. > > Ralph
Re: Should Log4j API bridges have a 3.x release?
> On May 30, 2024, at 7:43 AM, John Engebretson wrote: > > I agree on the complexity argument - and FWIW we still have many apps on > JDK 8 and are intimidated by the Spring upgrade, so I understand that. :) > Sounds like we agree there's no runtime impact? > John > I am not sure what you mean there. We are now building 2.x with JDK 17 but targeting JDK 8. With 3.x we can take advantage of anything added in JDK 11 or 17 so that could have a runtime impact. Ralph
