Hi Chris, Thank you for the reply. I understand there are Windows Me users too who would not want to lose Java 8 capability.
Stephen On Fri, 2021-12-17 at 15:04 +0000, Christofer Dutz wrote: > Hi Stephan, > > I fully agree, however we're talking about people that run Windows XP > for "reasons" ... some embedded hardware is very behind regarding > updates. For example I have an edge router device that only runs Java > 8 as latest version. > > So we just didn't want to exclude potential users if this doesn't > bring a big advantage for us. > > I guess that's why we sticked to Java 8. But I'm more than happy to > drop that requirement now. If then all of a sudden industry realizes > they need something for Java 8 they can always hire and pay someone > to do it ;-) > > Chris > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephen Snow <s40...@gmail.com> > Sent: Freitag, 17. Dezember 2021 14:38 > To: dev@plc4x.apache.org > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Officially go to Java 11 > > Isn't Java 11 pretty much default on any OS offering out there? Also > Java 17 is now the new stable future Java and is being adopted as the > default on leading edge OS's such as Fedora Linux for FC36 as > example. > I understand that in the enterprise world Java 8 will likely be in > use for some time in various areas, but I would think Java 11 will be > dominent there if it isn't already. > Just my opinion on it. > > Regards, > Stephen > > On Fri, 2021-12-17 at 12:16 +0000, Christofer Dutz wrote: > > Well yes, and no ... > > > > Generally, we should be Java 8 buildable (just plc4j) ... however > > some > > code had been added to the code generation that broke this "build > > on > > 8" feature (at least I know of the "orElseThrow()" usage. > > > > So we could fix this and make it buildable with Java 8 again ... or > > for the sake of simplicity we simply give up on Java 8 and simply > > continue to ensure the libraries we build are runnable on 8. > > > > Chris > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Otto Fowler <ottobackwa...@gmail.com> > > Sent: Freitag, 17. Dezember 2021 13:06 > > To: dev@plc4x.apache.org > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Officially go to Java 11 > > > > Just to clarify, we have required Java 11 to build for some time > > now, > > but our documentation has still stated java 8 or even both 11 and 8 > > in > > different places for a while now. > > > > From: Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> > > <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> > > Reply: dev@plc4x.apache.org <dev@plc4x.apache.org> > > <dev@plc4x.apache.org> > > Date: December 14, 2021 at 10:38:19 > > To: dev@plc4x.apache.org <dev@plc4x.apache.org> > > <dev@plc4x.apache.org> > > Subject: [DISCUSS] Officially go to Java 11 > > > > Hi all, > > > > Otto just bumped me about us still referencing Java 8 as minimum > > version. > > > > I think we could be Java 8 compatible, if we only want to build the > > java part. > > However as soon as we also build c or go, we need 11 due to the > > cmake-maven-plugin. > > Also do we need it in order to build some of the integration > > modules. > > > > So I think instead of investing time into ironing out the Java 8 > > incompatibilities, I would like to make the minimum version 11 > > officially. > > > > I know that in the past I said, that customers might be needing > > Java > > 1.8, but as officially almost nobody admits using PLC4X and we know > > nothing about the setups people are using we'll simply do a > > decision > > on the facts known to us. > > > > Right now, this is: > > > > * Supporting Java 8 adds more work for me and doesn't bring an > > advantage that I'm aware of. > > * Sebastian would love to officially be allowed to use Java 11 > > goodness > > > > Chris >
