Hi,

What is the concern with building using the latest LTS version (25 as of today) 
while still targeting Java 8 using the release javac flag? 


What am I overlooking?


Thanks!





 ---- On Sat, 07 Feb 2026 11:22:09 -0500  [email protected]  wrote ----

Hi,

as we all expect that it will take years that the majority of users will switch 
to Maven 4, we still have to support Maven 3 as surefire is one of the core 
plugins. Lifting the required Java version for a 3.x surefire (or any other 
plugin), therefore requires a lifting of the minimum Java version of Maven 3. 
So we need to find a fix or call Surefire 3.x EOL due to this. And as an 
information: Windows is used a lot in dev teams, esp in those companies with 
heaving policies.



Regarless of the rising ignorance of Windows users I agree on this statement:



>>

The idea I mentioned in another thread [2] is to keep aligning

Surefire with the model we already use for the rest of the codebase

(plugins, shared components, etc.):

- 3.x branch, versioned as 3.x, Core API 3.x (i.e. Java 8 support)

- master branch, versioned as 4.x, Core API 4.x (i.e. Java 17 support)



This is a pattern we’ve consistently adopted across all plugins. I

don’t really see why we should change it here.

>>



so a +1 (nb) to create a 4.x version and a 3.x release branch





Am 07.02.2026 um 05:29 schrieb Olivier Lamy:

> The idea I mentioned in another thread [2] is to keep aligning

> Surefire with the model we already use for the rest of the codebase

> (plugins, shared components, etc.):

> - 3.x branch, versioned as 3.x, Core API 3.x (i.e. Java 8 support)

> - master branch, versioned as 4.x, Core API 4.x (i.e. Java 17 support)

>

> This is a pattern we’ve consistently adopted across all plugins. I

> don’t really see why we should change it here.

Reply via email to