An interesting question for me is whether we need to think about companies that pay for old JDK support and how that affects our support for these old JDKs.
Gary On Mon, Feb 5, 2024, 4:28 PM Elliotte Rusty Harold <elh...@ibiblio.org> wrote: > On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 2:22 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > > Hi Elliotte, > > > Java 11 support is already EOL for most vendor until you go "premium" > > flavor which will likely be very few people and most of them will be able > > to pay somebody to backport the needed stuff in custom distro of their > work > > if needed anyday so not sure we should consider it. > > At least three big tech companies I know of build their own JDKs. At > least one, possibly two, ship and support older JDKs for their > customers. None of them are tied to Oracle and what Oracle is willing > to support. If Oracle and all its data went to the great bit bucket in > the sky tomorrow, they'd keep right on rolling. It would not even be a > speed bump. They don't pay for premium support. They compete to > provide premium support.* > > * There are some caveats here I won't go into for confidentiality > reasons, but I can say that Azul's business model works. > > > On the other side most libraries tend to move forward faster and if you > > like big ones, i'll take Spring or JakartaEE as an example - big user > base > > rather than big company$ ;) - and they don't even support Java 11 > anymore. > > Used by big tech customers. Not so much used by big tech companies > themselves, that tend to run on stacks developed in house over more > than a decade. > > -- > 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 > >
