I know that a build tool is different from a framework, but we are again missing the point here, is not about framework vs build tools, the point is that newer projects already require new Java versions, and if legacy projects require using an old Java version, then those projects will still be using Maven 3.x anyway and that is perfectly fine. What should be the threshold to move to a newer Java version? (I'm talking about using Java 11 on Maven 4.0, not on 3.x).
Sorry I didn't want to hijack this thread for the Java version discussion, yet I wish to know what is the benefit of "supporting" plugins on older versions of Maven, I'm asking as a user since I'm not a Maven core developer, PMC,r committer, just an occasional contributor, and again, I might be missing something, but what is the benefit of updating plugins on a project and using an older version of Maven? As a user is weird to me that Maven versions prior 3.8.x are EOL, yet plugins provide Maven API compatibility down to 3.2.5. It seems that is indeed a new challenge to require Maven 3.6.3 as minimal for core plugins ;) Regards and Happy New Year! On Sat, Dec 30, 2023 at 6:30 PM Michael Osipov <micha...@apache.org> wrote: > Am 2023-12-30 um 16:43 schrieb Jorge Solórzano: > > I'm a bit confused here, why would anyone update Maven plugins in a > project > > and NOT update Maven Core? Older versions of Maven are EOL, is expected > > that Maven Core is backward-compatible on minor releases so updating > Maven > > Core should be straightforward. I might be missing something but I don't > > see a scenario where someone updates plugins but does not update Maven > > itself, I would expect the opposite, it should be more common to update > > Maven core than plugins (although that is just my perception). > > > > The question remains: Why should we use 3.5.4 instead of 3.6.3 as a > minimum > > in plugins? don't get me wrong, I don't mind if we use 3.5.4 instead of > > 3.6.3 if the maintenance/support is the same, but knowing that CI uses > > Maven 3.6.3 and newer, and without knowing why plugins should be > supported > > on 3.5.4, my vote will go to use 3.6.3. > > > > This discussion reminds me of the minimum required Java version, there > was > > even an informal poll > > <https://twitter.com/khmarbaise/status/1549429653202518016> with more > than > > 80% asking for newer Java releases, and I would love to see Maven 4.0 > > require at least Java 11, but here we are, one year later and still on > Java > > 8 because some prefer to be working with Java 7 or even Java 6. The > > ecosystem is moving forward, SpringBoot, Quarkus, Jakarta EE, and some > > dependencies are slowly moving to at least Java 11, if a project requires > > Java 8 (for whatever reason), then it will remain on Maven 3.x, moving to > > Java 11 is conservative enough for Maven 4.0. > > You are confusing a low-level tool which should be accessible to > everyone compared to a specific framework. Regarding Spring Boot: I > consider that a total dick move dropping javax namespace support for a > huge user base. Regardless of the Java version. > > M > >
