> Platform applications are not limited to using the platform cluster. > There are multiple platform applications I'm aware of that use modules from > other clusters. Including one, possibly soon two, of my own.
Same here--my NetBeans Platform application ( https://www.ultorg.com/ ) uses most, but not all, of the modules in the "platform" cluster, as well as various hand-picked modules from the "ide" cluster (e.g. editor functionality and Database Explorer). -- Eirik -----Original Message----- From: Neil C Smith <neilcsm...@apache.org> Sent: Wednesday, February 8, 2023 4:07 AM To: Michael Bien <mbie...@gmail.com> Cc: dev <dev@netbeans.apache.org> Subject: Re: Lets talk about JDK 8 (new year edition) On Wed, 8 Feb 2023, 04:52 Michael Bien, <mbie...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 08.02.23 02:54, Neil C Smith wrote: > > On Tue, 7 Feb 2023 at 21:39, Michael Bien <mbie...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> However, I got the feeling, sooner or later someone will want to > >> have the platform again at a lower bytecode level than the rest of the IDE. > >> I hope I am wrong and this never happens again. If this happens we > >> can deal with this later, this isn't relevant for the immediate JDK > >> 11 step since it is supposed to finally sync everything. > > Again? That is not the situation now. > > now am confused... > > we have tests on 8 and 11. We build on 11 with bytecode level set to 8. > Some modules set it to 11. Yes. But there's nothing special about the platform cluster modules. All required modules (or dependencies of) across all clusters are built with max level 8. Optional modules, such as enhancing or overriding services, can specify 11. If running on 8 they should not enable and degrade cleanly. IDE runtime requirements say JDK 11. Well it is "officially supported" on JDK 11+. As we know it still technically runs on JDK 8, with a somewhat degraded experience. That was a requirement that led to the current arrangement - it wasn't platform vs rest of IDE. What I hope from this discussion that there won't be any 8s in that > paragraph above at some point in future. That is what I mean by "in sync". > Yes, me too! I'd like us to remove all 8s from that paragraph by NB19. And only commit to keeping any 11s in there until NB22. Best wishes, Neil
