Hi Jochen,
just a quick feedback: We use distinct classes derived from a Table base
class to model concrete database tables (e.g. PERSON_Table,
DEPARTMENT_Table, ADDRESS_Table, etc), but the different columns in
those tables are not modelled as separate classes, but are just
instances of the
> From: "Milles, Eric (TR Technology)"
> To: "dev"
> Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2022 3:29:54 PM
> Subject: RE: [EXT] Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy 5 planning
> Is there a compelling reason to drop support for Java 8? I don't see it
> holding
> us back quite like Java 7 support in Groovy 2.5 means no use
Is there a compelling reason to drop support for Java 8? I don't see it
holding us back quite like Java 7 support in Groovy 2.5 means no use of
lambdas, optional, functional interfaces, etc.
From: Paul King
Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2022 7:58 AM
To: Groovy_Developers
Subject: [EXT] Re:
I would certainly hope we had Groovy 6 with JDK17 minimum out before JDK11
support was phased out. It might be the case then that Groovy 4 and Groovy
6 are our "sort of LTS" versions at that point.
On Wed, May 11, 2022 at 2:22 PM J. David Beutel wrote:
> One thing to consider is the EOL
Comments inline. Basically, I agree other things might push us to JDK17
but I don't see them yet and I am just trying to see if we have consensus
to go to at least JDK11. If so, we can start the work and if we later go to 17
it will be a smaller incremental jump from 11.
On Wed, May 11, 2022 at
On 11.05.22 03:05, Paul King wrote:
Hi folks,
We still have a few things on our TODO list to improve Groovy 4, like
performance and some regressions, but we also need to start planning
for Groovy 5. I am happy for broad ranging discussions on Groovy 5 to
begin, so feel free to comment, but I
