Oracle recently changed its approach to version numbers for the JDK in which
minor version numbers get skipped, depending on the type of update. Pretty
sure there weren't 10 new JDK 5 releases.
--
Robert Patrick
VP, FMW Architects Team: The A-Team
Oracle Corporation
On 16 July 2013 23:45, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
> On Jul 16, 2013, at 5:42 PM, sebb wrote:
>
>> On 16 July 2013 22:37, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>> Typo on my part. There are 48 things to change when updating a release.
>>>
>>> I updated and triggered the publish an hour ago. I'm not sure when/how it
+1
2013/7/13 Robert Scholte :
> Hi,
>
> We solved 3 issues:
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11530&styleName=Html&version=19426
>
> There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&pid=11530&status=1
>
> S
2013/7/17 Stephen Connolly :
> On 16 July 2013 23:01, Arnaud Héritier wrote:
>
>> > >
>> >
>> > Until Jenkins gets upgraded to 1.520+ at which point the (crappy in my
>> > personal view) Maven job type will be unable to run 1.5
>> >
>> >
>> The crappy one which doesn't work with Maven 3.1.0 too (
We generally follow the practice of building on the target platform using
the tools of the target platform. EG on AIX using the same version of the
JDK that WAS runs on (typically using Jenkins).
That does not meant that I do not want to make use of the newer versions of
maven, it's plugins and th
On Jul 16, 2013, at 5:42 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 16 July 2013 22:37, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>> Typo on my part. There are 48 things to change when updating a release.
>>
>> I updated and triggered the publish an hour ago. I'm not sure when/how it
>> updates.
>
> Should be immediate (within a few
On 16 July 2013 23:25, Barrie Treloar wrote:
> On 17 July 2013 07:31, Arnaud Héritier wrote:
> >> Can still keep trucking with a FreeStyle + Maven Build Step though (and
> I
> >> prefer that way anyway)
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Me too if we backport features from the crappy maven integration into the
On 17 July 2013 07:31, Arnaud Héritier wrote:
>> Can still keep trucking with a FreeStyle + Maven Build Step though (and I
>> prefer that way anyway)
>>
>>
>
> Me too if we backport features from the crappy maven integration into the
> freestyle job (automatic dependencies, post build deployment
On 16 July 2013 23:01, Arnaud Héritier wrote:
> > >
> >
> > Until Jenkins gets upgraded to 1.520+ at which point the (crappy in my
> > personal view) Maven job type will be unable to run 1.5
> >
> >
> The crappy one which doesn't work with Maven 3.1.0 too (I tested it this
> afternoon)
>
I'm su
> >
>
> Until Jenkins gets upgraded to 1.520+ at which point the (crappy in my
> personal view) Maven job type will be unable to run 1.5
>
>
The crappy one which doesn't work with Maven 3.1.0 too (I tested it this
afternoon)
> Can still keep trucking with a FreeStyle + Maven Build Step though (a
On 16 July 2013 21:52, Kristian Rosenvold wrote:
> Look you chickens; until quite recently I kept a 1.3 JVM running on
> windows to do the occasional
> test of surefire on jdk 1.3. (I kept a vmware image since installing 1.3
> on linux required surrendering your first born to Sauron) All your
> c
On 16 July 2013 22:37, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> Typo on my part. There are 48 things to change when updating a release.
>
> I updated and triggered the publish an hour ago. I'm not sure when/how it
> updates.
Should be immediate (within a few seconds), assuming svnpubsub is
running normally.
> On
On Fri, 12 Jul 2013 23:12:02 +0200
"Robert Scholte" wrote:
+1,
works fine to me,
thanks,
tony.
> Hi,
>
> We solved 3 issues:
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11530&styleName=Html&version=19426
>
> There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
> http://jira.cod
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 11:37 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
> Typo on my part. There are 48 things to change when updating a release.
>
Ok. I wasn't sure if it was intentional
I agree, that's a pain to do a release :(
>
> I updated and triggered the publish an hour ago. I'm not sure when/how it
>
Typo on my part. There are 48 things to change when updating a release.
I updated and triggered the publish an hour ago. I'm not sure when/how it
updates.
On Jul 16, 2013, at 5:34 PM, Arnaud Héritier wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Do we consider the 3.1.0 as the latest stable ?
>
> On the download page
Hi,
Do we consider the 3.1.0 as the latest stable ?
On the download page there is a typo (?)
http://maven.apache.org/download.cgi
Maven 3.1.0 :This is the future of Maven (alpha status).
On the homepage we always have the "Get Maven 3.0.5" on the right
http://maven.apache.org/index.html
16. juli 2013 kl. 07:35 skrev Stephen Connolly
:
> - have we good test coverage with toolchains?
No.
Kristian
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache
Look you chickens; until quite recently I kept a 1.3 JVM running on windows to
do the occasional
test of surefire on jdk 1.3. (I kept a vmware image since installing 1.3 on
linux required surrendering your first born to Sauron) All your complaining
about not being able to run 1.5 sounds like c
What I do not really understand:
- Say I am a company which are forced to run JDK1.5 because they have
to recertificate everything due to Sarbains-Oxley or German GOBS.
- Would I not force my developers to use the same tools to build they
used for previous versions, then?
- Maven 3 behaves slightl
+1
Regards,
Hervé
Le vendredi 12 juillet 2013 23:12:02 Robert Scholte a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> We solved 3 issues:
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=11530&styleName=H
> tml&version=19426
>
> There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secur
For now what is resulting from this thread is :
* We do a survey to better know where our user are and were they are going
* We check what is the status of our tools (toolchains & co) to be sure how
we can "easily" use versions of java older than the one required by maven
* We discuss on the ML to
> Isn't the convention way to omit the last zero? This has been done for
> Maven and all plugins/components before.
>
No, we have 2.1.0 and 2.2.0 for the Maven core distro. Plugins would/could
be a different story though.
/Anders
>
> Mike
>
>
>
> --**
Just to clarify my comments:
I can't and won't build anything with anything higher than J6 for the
foreseeable future, maybe upto 2 years or so, who knows.
J7 is purely a runtime option for users for me, same for J8. J5 is dead for
both builds and runtime in my eyes. I'd prefer to maximise my cho
Yep.
Sent from my iPhone
On 16 Jul 2013, at 20:24, "Arnaud Héritier" wrote:
> Can you tell me if now you can see the result :
> https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1Jqxq2KgSricwS7YV7pmWvHA8m7_TE7c8JhusugPmGW4/viewanalytics
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Kristian Rosenvold <
> kristian.rosen
Can you tell me if now you can see the result :
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1Jqxq2KgSricwS7YV7pmWvHA8m7_TE7c8JhusugPmGW4/viewanalytics
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Kristian Rosenvold <
kristian.rosenv...@zenior.no> wrote:
> I tucked away the last public debs of 1.5 and can release 1.5
>
FYI, in the next version of logback, i.e. 2.0, we will be using JDK 1.6.
However, the logback 1.1.x series will continue to be based on JDK 1.5.
On 16.07.2013 07:06, Stephen Connolly wrote:
So what I am hearing is that until we bump core to require JDK6 (or 7) then
logback is the only runner
I tucked away the last public debs of 1.5 and can release 1.5
indefinitely. In the release of the last security patch, it seems like
Oracle have released approx 10 nonpublic jdk 5 versions. Shame we can't
have it.
Kristian
Den 16. juli 2013 14:14 skrev "Lennart Jörelid"
følgende:
> I rum mainl
The last project I was on was migrating WAS/WPS/Portal V6 (JDK 1.4) ->
WAS/BPM/Portal V8 (JDK 1.6).
Why?
Because the support costs for EOL software finally made it cost effective
to upgrade! :-)
And even then, it was meant to be a "lift and shift" as in just keep the
functionality the same as mu
*BUT* such agencies also find it "too expensive to upgrade Maven to 3.2" so
we don't actually have to worry about them ;-)
If you are a refusenick on JVM you are likely also a refusenik on Maven ;-)
On 16 July 2013 13:45, Martin Gainty wrote:
> Folks
>
> In the states..government sector (speci
Hi,
The release vote is already in progress.
Cheers,
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 10:17 AM, David Karlsen wrote:
> Hi.
>
> Would anybody care to release the enforcer 1.3.1 plugin so we can go around
> http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MENFORCER-156?
>
> All issues for 1.3.1 are fixed:
>
> http://ji
Nice idea to have this survey to have some feedback from users.
Do you think it may be possible to make this kind of survey to get feedback for
maven web site (not plugin) or other area of maven ?
Eric
Joke: perso win user so using jdk8 or jdk7 according to the os version
Real: jdk 7 on server
Hi.
Would anybody care to release the enforcer 1.3.1 plugin so we can go around
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MENFORCER-156?
All issues for 1.3.1 are fixed:
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MENFORCER/fixforversion/19426#selectedTab=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.project%3Aversion-issues-panel
Folks
In the states..government sector (specifically State Agencies) lag at least 5
years behind available current releases
the specific example I provide is the app I was working on was based on JVM 1.5
the Portal was based on JVM 1.4
the end result was:
Annotations: NOPE
Generics: NOPE
Efficien
Me:
Linux, Windows, AIX (and if I have too, OS/2!) 1.4, 5, 6 and if I need it,
I can get 7.
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 10:13 PM, Lennart Jörelid wrote:
> I rum mainly on OSX for client and some Linuxes for server - so client
> side is >= JDK 1.6
>
> // vänlig hälsning,
> // [sw: "best regards"],
I rum mainly on OSX for client and some Linuxes for server - so client side is
>= JDK 1.6
// vänlig hälsning,
// [sw: "best regards"],
//
// Lennart Jörelid
16 jul 2013 kl. 13:53 skrev Olivier Lamy :
> perso osx. So only >= 1.6
>
>
> 2013/7/16 Stephen Connolly :
>> Speaking as a Maven Develop
perso osx. So only >= 1.6
2013/7/16 Stephen Connolly :
> Speaking as a Maven Developer...
>
> My primary development machine is OS-X.
>
> On that machine I have 1.6.0_24-b07-334, 1.7.0_17, 1.7.0_21, and 1.7.0_25
>
> I have a personal linode running 1.6.0_22, and my famous Acer Aspire One
> that h
Recent MacOS also thus only Java 1.6 and 1.7.
Maybe I could setup a VM with a Java 1.5 but to be honest I already have
not enough time to contribute thus working on Maven inside a VM will never
occur.
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Stephen Connolly <
stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote:
> S
Speaking as a Maven Developer...
My primary development machine is OS-X.
On that machine I have 1.6.0_24-b07-334, 1.7.0_17, 1.7.0_21, and 1.7.0_25
I have a personal linode running 1.6.0_22, and my famous Acer Aspire One
that has some Java 1.5 and 1.6 versions on it... but I have not turned it
on
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 6:26 PM, Lennart Jörelid
wrote:
> This is not (or should not be) an entirely technical question - support for
> various versions of JDK may be the simpler criterion to discuss, but I feel
> the more relevant question is
>
> "Do we first and foremost see small-scale projects
Oracle Java 5 and 6 are EOLed but Oracle continues to support customers using
commercial products that require them that themselves are not EOLed. Given
that current versions of Maven support Java 5 and 6, the real question is how
important is it for older applications that cannot support Java
On 16 July 2013 09:44, Fred Cooke wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Chris Graham wrote:
>
>> Michael's point about omiting the trailing .0 is valid, and introducing it
>> now does not follow the established convention.
>> Is it going to be cleaned up?
>>
>
> I sincerely hope not! That wou
I've put a question on Stack Overflow:
http://stackoverflow.com/questions/17671899/when-is-java-6-end-of-life-in-the-context-of-writing-developer-toolsto
see if we can get something that is a bit more focus on facts.
e.g. we are all OSS developers: thus premium/extended/sustaining support
contract
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 8:14 AM, Chris Graham wrote:
> Michael's point about omiting the trailing .0 is valid, and introducing it
> now does not follow the established convention.
> Is it going to be cleaned up?
>
I sincerely hope not! That would involve potential for confusion should
anyone hav
This is not (or should not be) an entirely technical question - support for
various versions of JDK may be the simpler criterion to discuss, but I feel
the more relevant question is
"Do we first and foremost see small-scale projects [small organisations] or
enterprise-scale projects [enterprise-sc
My 2c:
- J7 on Mac is unstable (trust me...) and non-performant, and thus I
require my users to use Apple's J6 on the Mac.
- On Linux there are lots of Swing bugs in all versions, but a lot less
in J7 than J6, so I recommend J7 for Linux guys.
- I don't use J5 for anything at all an
Hi Arnaud.
You need to at least add an OTHER (ie non oracle) entry as well. You you
can track Oracle java 6 and Non-Oracle java 6.
-Chris
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 4:19 PM, Arnaud Héritier wrote:
> Good point. I updated the survey to tell it is the Oracle JDK EOL
> Survey :
>
> https://docs.goog
46 matches
Mail list logo
