Hi Jon, I took Derby as example, it's more a general topic.
It's also a question of timing, I can cut 5.16.0 as it's (with JDK 11 support but still JDK 8 support as well) and prepare 5.17.0 with JDK9 min. Regards JB On 31/10/2019 11:35, Jonathan Gallimore wrote: > Personally, I'd prefer something that still ran on Java 8, but I'll > understand if I'm in the minority. > > What benefits do we get from upgrading Derby to 10.15.1.3 and therefore > requiring Java 9? > > Jon > > On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 10:26 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > wrote: > >> Hi guys, >> >> As I'm working on 5.16.0 release preparation, it's important to agree >> about the minimum Java version for runtime of this version. >> >> The purpose is to fully support JDK 9+ (and so 11, 12, 13). >> >> I started some upgrade to fully support those Java versions (for >> instance Derby 10.15.1.3 upgrade). >> >> We have two options here: >> >> - still support JDK8 and run with newer version (and then, we have to >> keep JDK8 compliant dependencies, like Derby 10.14.2.0 for instance) >> - define JDK9 as minimum version to run and then, we can upgrade the >> dependencies. >> >> Thoughts ? >> >> Regards >> JB >> -- >> Jean-Baptiste Onofré >> jbono...@apache.org >> http://blog.nanthrax.net >> Talend - http://www.talend.com >> > -- Jean-Baptiste Onofré jbono...@apache.org http://blog.nanthrax.net Talend - http://www.talend.com
