+1 for Java8 if it speeds this up!

On Wed, Sep 25, 2024 at 3:46 PM Josh Fenlason
<josh.fenla...@veritas.com.invalid> wrote:

> While some might have some preferences on more recent Java versions, I
> haven't seen any objections to Java 8.  Staying on Java 8 shouldn't really
> cause issues for anyone.  Can we settle on Java 8 so this isn't an
> impediment to getting a new BeanUtils 2.0 release out the door?
> Josh.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Xeno Amess <xenoam...@gmail.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2024 5:21 AM
> To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [beanutils] Java plaform for 2.0
>
>
> CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click
> links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the
> content is safe. If you believe this is a phishing email, use the Report to
> Cybersecurity icon in Outlook.
>
>
>
> I'd prefer 17 for myself, but I know it might be slightly
> aggresive/radical .
> Anyway, if using versions equals/under 17, we can use Spring as a shield
> or something, as for people they wanna upgrade spring version they must
> upgrade their program to support jdk17 = = "don't blame us, Spring did the
> upgrade first" or something lol
>
> Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> 于2024年9月17日周二 05:03写道:
>
> > I think that for now I am leaning towards staying on Java 8.
> >
> > Gary
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 14, 2024, 3:42 AM Xeno Amess <xenoam...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > for 90%+ normal user each version under which spring using be OK
> > > ________________________________
> > > From: Richard Zowalla <rich...@zowalla.com>
> > > Sent: Saturday, September 14, 2024 12:59:15 PM
> > > To: Commons Developers List <dev@commons.apache.org>
> > > Subject: Re: [beanutils] Java plaform for 2.0
> > >
> > > My 2 cents are: BeanUtils is often used in the EE ecosystem EE 9.1
> > targets
> > > 8/11, EE 10 targets 11/17, EE 11 targets 17 or higher.
> > >
> > > People are still doing the EE8 to 9.1/10 move (thanks to the name
> > change).
> > > So perhaps 11 or 17 would be a good fit for a baseline version.
> > >
> > > Gruß
> > > Richard
> > >
> > > Am 14. September 2024 00:00:48 MESZ schrieb sebb <seb...@gmail.com>:
> > > >On Fri, 13 Sept 2024 at 22:01, Gary Gregory
> > > ><garydgreg...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> The age does not really matter Elric, it's the percentage of
> > > >> people
> > > using a
> > > >> platform. See the links in my previous email. I think the highest
> > > >> we
> > > can go
> > > >> is 17, but that's just me.
> > > >
> > > >According to the 3rd link, Java version usage in 2024 is
> > > >
> > > >7 - 0.2%
> > > >8 - 28.8%
> > > >11 - 32.9%
> > > >17 - 35.4%
> > > >21 - 1.4%
> > > >
> > > >Here is the list showing the percentages that will no longer be
> > > >supported by choosing a particular version:
> > > >
> > > >7 - 0%
> > > >8 - 0.2%
> > > >11 - 29%
> > > >17 - 61.9%
> > > >21 - 97.3%
> > > >
> > > >Bigger is definitely not better here.
> > > >
> > > >> Gary
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, Sep 13, 2024, 4:11 PM Elric <el...@melnib.one> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > On 12/09/2024 19:21, Gary D. Gregory wrote:
> > > >> > > Hi All,
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Any thoughts on the minimum Java platform requirement for 2.0?
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Options are (IMO): 8, 11, 17, or 21.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I have no vote, but I would go for 21. This will likely be a
> > decision
> > > >> > that will have an impact for a long time. 21 is 1 year old, 17
> > > >> > is 3 years old, 11 is already already 6 years old, and 8 is
> > > >> > over 10 years
> > > old.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > People can continue to use 1.x if they are stuck on ancient
> > > >> > Java versions, but there should be no need to for any major
> > > >> > release of
> > any
> > > >> > commons project to stick to older versions.
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> > > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >
> > > >-------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> > > >For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


-- 
==============================
Melloware
melloware...@gmail.com
http://melloware.com
==============================

Reply via email to