As an end user, having a single version of Maven that could build all my projects (Java 8 - 21) would be preferred, even if it requires Java 21 to run. That would allow for build pipeline standardization on a single version of Maven and simplify things for developers.
That being said, if retiring Java 8 and lower output support allows Maven to shed technical debt and deliver improvements faster, I'd get over my disappointment. :) Regards, Robert Dean On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 3:49 PM Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> wrote: > > I think this starts to make reasonable picture: > > If you are on Java 8, use Maven 3 > If you are on Java 9+ use Maven 4 (once out). > > For start, Maven3 has no idea (notion) about "classpaths" vs "modulepaths" > (is not quite true stated like this, it has SOME heuristics, that is mostly > shoot-and-miss). > > So, I think it makes sense to have Maven 4 as Java 17, as folks in "big > tech" with strict processes, policies and what not will not migrate anyway > to Maven4. They have Maven3. > > T > > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 9:23 PM Benjamin Marwell <bmarw...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > Brian, any Chance you could make a stacked 100% graph for every *week* > > of the past two years? > > We could then see where we are heading… > > (or the raw numbers per week, so we could work with that). > > > > That's probably a lot to ask, but I think it will show us how "fast" > > the progression was (and will be). > > > > @Tamas please consider the support times are different by vendor. > > I have seen Java 8 support well beyond 2030 *shudder*. > > > > Seeing all those numbers, I now feel a lot more confident that Maven 4 > > should be 17 (runtime), 21 (build) > > and Java 8 users should stay with 3.x.x. > > Elliotte gave a good reason for this: There are two camps now (read: > > ALREADY). > > There is no reason to not go with either of them. > > > > Am Do., 22. Feb. 2024 um 19:56 Uhr schrieb Brian Fox <bri...@infinity.nu>: > > > > > > We dumped 30 days because that gives a good snapshot of what's happening > > > right now. If we dumped for example the whole year, then it really blurs > > > the lines all over the place and things newer will be less prominent just > > > because they didn't have as much time. 30 days is how we typically bucket > > > things when we want a form of relative popularity. > > > > > > As far as toy projects skewing, Tamas is right, the scale of central data > > > is so large that it's insignificant. Also remember we only counted each > > IP > > > once per entry so even projects downloading over and over won't skew the > > > results. > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
