Possible, probably yes. Might be quite some work to make it run, though. Anyway - not sure if that would bring significant benefits if we wanted to keep the platform on 8 and move the rest (i.e. what would be made simpler by this? We can ensure platform is buildable by and runs on 8 even in a single repo).
Jan On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 1:02 PM Eric Barboni <sk...@apache.org> wrote: > As I'm an expert in architecture :D kidding > > Can it be possible to have like two repository one for netbeans-platform > and netbeans with platform "seen as library" ? > With netbeans-platform jdk8 and the netbeans with jdk 8+ ? > > Regards > Eric > -----Message d'origine----- > De : Neil C Smith <neilcsm...@apache.org> > Envoyé : vendredi 28 février 2020 11:29 > À : dev <dev@netbeans.apache.org> > Objet : Re: Platform has to continue to support Java 8, imho was: Pull the > plug from Java 8 in 12.1? > > On Fri, 28 Feb 2020 at 09:55, Jaroslav Tulach <jaroslav.tul...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > PS: The `nb-javac` issue: IGV is actually using Java editing modules, > > so we are interested in having nb-javac working on JDK8. We bundle the > > `nb-javac` as part of IGV - e.g. there is no need to download > > `nb-javac`. Enough to use it when present. I assume we can help with > > the maintenance of this part of the code base. Dušan Bálek, Tomáš > > Zezula, Sváťa Dědic and last but not least Jan Lahoda have a lot of > > expertise in this area and can make sure parsing of Java sources on > > JDK8 still works (even it will not be used by Apache NetBeans IDE > itself). > > This to me is the crux of the issue. My comment on the users@ thread was > more with thought of stopping default/official support of Java editing when > running on JDK 8. ie. at least making nb-javac far more optional from 12.1 > than it is now. > > It does not seem sustainable to keep telling people with refactoring > issues to uninstall nb-javac. Somehow those issues need addressing, > particularly if they're in code we have no control of here. I think more > help on the maintenance of this part, particularly with regard to any > updates for Java 14 support, might be good in the 12.0 timeframe. > Java 13 updates for nb-javac during the 11.2 release (which also required > 11.2u1) were a PITA! That was my real reason for being in favour of > shifting the whole schedule back a month - not Eric's Xmas. > ;-) > I'm sad :D > > Longer term we need to start making nb-javac less (then not) required. > At least initially making it something legacy to opt in to rather than opt > out of seems a good move? From an ASF point of view I think the way > nb-javac and JavaFX are currently installed may be pushing at the limits of > compliance. > > Best wishes, > > Neil > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org > > For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org > > For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists > > > >
