Hey All.
Regarding the discussions around upgrading to a minimum of Java 1.6.
Whilst I understand the desire for developers to play with something shiny
and new, I do find that the current 1.5 based Maven is more than sufficient
for our needs.
I lot of responses about the upgrade are normally ar
Totally agree... if people really need to build for older Java runtimes
they still can.. but if Oracle thinks they dont want to support JDK < 1.7
without getting paid why would the Maven project do it ;-)
For now 1.6 seems just fine and I would even say a jump to 1.7 in the next
year or three (;-
On 6 February 2013 23:18, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> 2013/2/6 Mark Struberg :
> >
> >
> > What are the big features and possibilities we gain from 1.6?
> Honestly I don't see any.
> > Build systems are pretty late in the chain. We should still be able to
> build on systems which are 2+ years old.
> >
2013/2/6 Mark Struberg :
>
>
> What are the big features and possibilities we gain from 1.6?
Honestly I don't see any.
> Build systems are pretty late in the chain. We should still be able to build
> on systems which are 2+ years old.
>
> Is there a technical reason to restrict this or is it just
What are the big features and possibilities we gain from 1.6?
Build systems are pretty late in the chain. We should still be able to build on
systems which are 2+ years old.
Is there a technical reason to restrict this or is it just that we don't
actively support it anymore (not doing IT, etc
+1 (non-binding)
On Wed, Feb 6, 2013 at 4:31 PM, Baptiste MATHUS wrote:
> +1, bump to JDK6 minimum for Maven.
>
>
> 2013/2/6 Stephen Connolly
>
> > I think we should at least have a minor version bump on core to
> > co-incide... Though I think calling it maven 4.0 might be better (that
> way
>
+1, bump to JDK6 minimum for Maven.
2013/2/6 Stephen Connolly
> I think we should at least have a minor version bump on core to
> co-incide... Though I think calling it maven 4.0 might be better (that way
> we catch up with the model version ;-)
>
> On Wednesday, 6 February 2013, Olivier Lamy w
I think we should at least have a minor version bump on core to
co-incide... Though I think calling it maven 4.0 might be better (that way
we catch up with the model version ;-)
On Wednesday, 6 February 2013, Olivier Lamy wrote:
> Hi,
> As we are now in 2013, it's probably time to think about tha
Hi,
As we are now in 2013, it's probably time to think about that (again).
Reading [1], even 1.6 won't be anymore updated after feb 2013.
Can we say we are safe to go to 1.6 as minimum required ?
NOTE: That will probably need a vote. So depending on how the thread
move, I will start a vote (or n
I see your point, although I don't know how often you need to add this
option to the commandline to be able to build your project. I would expect
almost every time once you're hitting this issue.
Still I have my doubts if it should be a new option.
From the CLIManager:
options.addOption( Opti
good catch. (sorry I don't have anymore 1.5 locally and animal sniffer
was not configured)
So I cancel the vote.
As we are now in 2013, I will start a vote on an other thread to move
to 1.6 required to see reactions.
2013/2/6 Robert Scholte :
> -1
>
> I've checked out the code from
> https://svn
-1
I've checked out the code from
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/maven/plugins/tags/maven-pmd-plugin-3.0
and tried to compile it with JDK5 and I got the compilation error.
Robert
Op Wed, 06 Feb 2013 19:05:30 +0100 schreef Robert Scholte
:
I noticed some compilation errors with the P
I noticed some compilation errors with the PMD plugin
https://builds.apache.org/view/M-R/view/Maven/job/maven-plugins/1417/console
Robert
Op Mon, 04 Feb 2013 22:54:03 +0100 schreef Olivier Lamy :
Hi,
I'd like to release Maven Pmd Plugin 3.0.
Note this version is based on PMD 5.0.1 (reason
2013/2/6 James Nord (jnord)
>
> > If these are being released into Central - then they *will* never change.
> > They are Golden.
>
> > Prior to getting their, e.g. during the voting process, these jars are
> released
> > into a staging area.
> > You are invited to try those jars from the staging
> -Original Message-
> From: Barrie Treloar [mailto:baerr...@gmail.com]
> Sent: 06 February 2013 02:37
> To: Maven Developers List
> Subject: Re: Testing [Vote] plugins?
>
> On 6 February 2013 10:39, Benson Margulies
> wrote:
> > The issue here is that someone in our community might liv
> If these are being released into Central - then they *will* never change.
> They are Golden.
> Prior to getting their, e.g. during the voting process, these jars are
> released
> into a staging area.
> You are invited to try those jars from the staging area to ensure they dont
> have regression
16 matches
Mail list logo
