On Tue, 26 May 2020 at 22:47, Elliotte Rusty Harold <elh...@ibiblio.org> wrote:
> I don't think I've seen anything earlier than 3.3.x in recent memory, > but 3.3.x is definitely still out there in the wild being used for new > development. > > Given the massive amount of important work that remains to be done to > upgrade plugins to Maven 3.1 and Java 7, or even Maven 3 and Java 5, I > would hate to see people expending any energy on Java 8 right now. The > ROI on that migration is neutral at best and possibly negative if > people go all in on lambdas. > it will be possible to use java8 but it's not mandatory. Don't this feature about being able to java8 as a mandatory "we have to migrate the code" It's just when working on fixing bug or improving some parts you can or not use java8. lambdas can be nice in some cases by making code more readable. I see this as a way to attract more people to contribute by using new java language features. > > On Mon, May 25, 2020 at 4:53 PM Olivier Lamy <ol...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > @All > > Can we update the compatibility plan document saying we support from > 3.5.4 > > and 3.6.3. > > plugins will use API from 3.5.4 and can use java8 from now (June 2020) . > > As 3.7.0 is on his way (soon) supporting 3 series seems enough. (with > 3.7.0 > > using java8) > > @Robert > > As you didn't answer, I wonder if you still have strong opinions? > > > > > > On Sun, 24 May 2020 at 18:46, Michael Osipov <micha...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > > Am 2020-05-24 um 10:41 schrieb Olivier Lamy: > > > > On Sat, 23 May 2020 at 21:33, Robert Scholte <rfscho...@apache.org> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> As discussed before: compatibility should either be 3.3.1 (since > 3.3.0 > > > >> didn't make it) or 3.5.0, we should not include the (highest) bugfix > > > >> version. > > > >> > > > > Great this means we can can rid of this hackhish refection stuff for > > > > aether... > > > > > > > > you mean we should support 3.3.1 3.3.3 and 3.3.9? > > > > by support I mean fixing security issues. > > > > so in this case what happen in case of a security issue for 3.3.1 do > we > > > > have a to release 3.3.1.1 3.3.3.1 3.3.9.1 > > > > Not sure I understand what we mean with support? > > > > anyway if we say all plugins must be at least 3.3.1 it's good > progress > > > > > > I think we have discussed this before as I have raised this at least > > > once this one. The upshot is that we try to support (in terms of API > and > > > ABI) in Plugins and Components a huge variety of Maven versions, but > > > only the last stable minor branch of Maven receives fixes. > > > > > > > > > -- > > Olivier Lamy > > http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy > > > > -- > Elliotte Rusty Harold > elh...@ibiblio.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > -- Olivier Lamy http://twitter.com/olamy | http://linkedin.com/in/olamy
