I'm also a +1.

Thanks,
Jeff

On Sun, Jun 4, 2023 at 7:08 AM Atita Arora <atitaar...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1 from my side !
> Let's move with time, :) I wonder if we have use cases where we need to
> support backward compatibility.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Jun 4, 2023 at 12:31 PM Martin Wiesner <mawie...@apache.org>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi everybody,
> >
> > Does anyone else have feedback or wants to share his/her opinion
> regarding
> > the move to Java 17?
> >
> > Best
> > Martin
> > —
> > https://twitter.com/mawiesne
> > https://github.com/mawiesne
> >
> >
> > On 2023/05/30 18:05:28 Richard Zowalla wrote:
> > > +1
> > >
> > > Am Dienstag, dem 30.05.2023 um 16:49 +0200 schrieb Martin Wiesner:
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > time progresses and Java 11 LTS is set to be EOL with 30 Sep 2023
> > > > (see: https://endoflife.date/java).  Therefore, some days ago, I’ve
> > > > opened OPENNLP-1496, proposing to migrate OpenNLP’s codebase to Java
> > > > 17 LTS, see: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OPENNLP-1496.
> > > >
> > > > The (official) EOL date will hit pretty soon. With that in mind, the
> > > > project should consider to migrate the build and target JDK towards
> > > > the next LTS release, that is: Java 17. This will be supported until
> > > > at least 30 Sep 2026.
> > > >
> > > > The primary aims that I identified are:
> > > > - Keep pace with the Java ecosystem,
> > > > - Modernizes the code base with new(er) language features,
> > > > - Benefit by performance enhancements and fixes provided with 17.x
> > > > LTS.
> > > >
> > > > A PR that demonstrates that all build steps (GH actions) are green,
> > > > and no blockers occur, is already available here:
> > > > https://github.com/apache/opennlp/pull/535
> > > > and received some feedback.
> > > >
> > > > With that being said, I’d like reach out here on the list(s) and to
> > > > get your opinions on moving on to J17. Open for (m)any comments.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks
> > > > mawiesne
> > > > —
> > > > https://twitter.com/mawiesne
> > > > https://github.com/mawiesne
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to