THAT said, I would be OK with going through all the code, removing all the stuff marked deprecated, update to JDK8, and call it 3.0. :-) It’s just a version number. We can always do a 4.0 if needed/wanted.
Dan > On Jan 29, 2016, at 8:21 AM, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote: > >> >> On Jan 29, 2016, at 3:21 AM, Christian Müller <christian.muel...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> Yes, it's a minor release. And regarding to [1]: >> >> MINOR version when you add functionality in a backwards-compatible manner >> >> And that's not the case, if you have to upgrade your JRE. > > How is it not backwards compatible? All of your source that you used with > Camel 2.16 should compile and run fine with 2.18. You need to update your > JDK, but the source and API’s and everything are still completely compatible. > From an API standpoint, compatible. And the SemVer thing is all about the > API’s. > > > But like was already said, I don’t think we’ve EVER done a Camel release that > didn’t upgrade a dependency in an underlying library that wasn’t compatible. > We’ve dropped support for versions of things like jetty and older versions of > sl4fj and older versions of Karaf and such as well. > > Dan > > > >> >> [1] http://semver.org/ >> >> Best, >> Christian >> ----------------- >> >> Software Integration Specialist >> >> Apache Member >> V.P. Apache Camel | Apache Camel PMC Member | Apache Camel committer >> Apache Incubator PMC Member >> >> https://www.linkedin.com/pub/christian-mueller/11/551/642 >> >> On Fri, Jan 29, 2016 at 1:31 AM, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> >>> 2.16 -> 2.17 is not a patch release, it’s a minor release with new >>> features and dependency updates and such. >>> >>> 2.16.1 -> 2.16.2 is a patch release. >>> >>> I would agree no changes in JDK requirements on a patch release. A minor >>> release is different. >>> >>> Dan >>> >>> >>> >>>> On Jan 28, 2016, at 5:52 PM, Christian Müller < >>> christian.muel...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> I'm with James (even we did it otherwise in the past). A patch release >>>> shouldn't require you to upgrade your JRE. >>>> >>>> Camel 2.17 = Java 1.7 >>>> Camel 3.0 = Java 1.8 >>>> >>>> May it forces us to work on Camel 3.0 ;-) >>>> >>>> Best, >>>> Christian >>>> ----------------- >>>> >>>> Software Integration Specialist >>>> >>>> Apache Member >>>> V.P. Apache Camel | Apache Camel PMC Member | Apache Camel committer >>>> Apache Incubator PMC Member >>>> >>>> https://www.linkedin.com/pub/christian-mueller/11/551/642 >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 7:13 PM, Claus Ibsen <claus.ib...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 3:48 PM, James Carman >>>>> <ja...@carmanconsulting.com> wrote: >>>>>> I would rather us bump the major version number if we're going to start >>>>>> requiring users to use Java8. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Yeah that was also my first thought. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I would like to keep Camel 2.17 as-is on Java 1.7. Then if 2.18 is >>>>> Java 1.8+ then its much easier to remember as the numbers are aligned. >>>>> >>>>> Camel 2.17 = Java 1.7 >>>>> Camel 2.18 = Java 1.8 >>>>> >>>>> We can always release Camel 2.17 sooner, its been a while since 2.16, >>>>> so maybe aim for a release in next month? >>>>> >>>>> A reason to keep it on 1.7 is also it would otherwise throw some Camel >>>>> end users under the bus anticipating they can use it on Java 1.7. Then >>>>> we can announce Camel 2.17 would be the last release with Java 1.7 - >>>>> even ahead of time. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Jan 28, 2016 at 9:35 AM Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> For master (targeting 2.17), I see we’re still setup for Java7. >>> Would >>>>>>> it make sense to move to requiring Java8? We can certainly start >>> taking >>>>>>> advantage of the new things in Java8, but there are also dependencies >>>>> (like >>>>>>> Jetty) that now require Java8 and more and more of them will be >>>>> requiring >>>>>>> that. (example: CXF 3.2 will be Java8 only as well) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It sometimes makes back merging fixes to 2.16/2.15 tricky if you use >>>>> Java8 >>>>>>> features, but that’s going to be a problem eventually anyway. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> Daniel Kulp >>>>>>> dk...@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog >>>>>>> Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Claus Ibsen >>>>> ----------------- >>>>> http://davsclaus.com @davsclaus >>>>> Camel in Action 2: https://www.manning.com/ibsen2 >>>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Daniel Kulp >>> dk...@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog >>> Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com >>> >>> > > -- > Daniel Kulp > dk...@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog > Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com -- Daniel Kulp dk...@apache.org - http://dankulp.com/blog Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com
