I created OAK-4189 to track this. Unless someone has a strong reason
against this change, I will commit it this afternoon.
2016-04-08 9:18 GMT+02:00 Davide Giannella :
> On 07/04/2016 17:12, Julian Sedding wrote:
> > We could enforce java6 signatures for the branches using the
> > animal-sniffer-
On 07/04/2016 17:12, Julian Sedding wrote:
> We could enforce java6 signatures for the branches using the
> animal-sniffer-maven-plugin. This should help detect bogus backports
> quickly.
>
+1.
Davide
We could enforce java6 signatures for the branches using the
animal-sniffer-maven-plugin. This should help detect bogus backports
quickly.
Regards
Julian
On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 10:57 AM, Francesco Mari
wrote:
> Language features would be available for new, backport-free developments.
> Existing
Language features would be available for new, backport-free developments.
Existing code doesn't have to use those features if they would be an issue
during backports.
2016-04-07 10:25 GMT+02:00 Davide Giannella :
> On 06/04/2016 15:25, Francesco Mari wrote:
> > I was talking about trunk, of cours
On 06/04/2016 15:25, Francesco Mari wrote:
> I was talking about trunk, of course. Developers working in areas where
> backports are the norm have to carefully consider if and when using Java 7
> language features would be appropriate. New portions of the codebase could
> use of the new features fr
On 6.4.16 4:25 , Francesco Mari wrote:
I was talking about trunk, of course. Developers working in areas where
backports are the norm have to carefully consider if and when using Java 7
language features would be appropriate. New portions of the codebase could
use of the new features freely.
I was talking about trunk, of course. Developers working in areas where
backports are the norm have to carefully consider if and when using Java 7
language features would be appropriate. New portions of the codebase could
use of the new features freely.
2016-04-06 16:19 GMT+02:00 Julian Reschke :
On 2016-04-06 14:27, Francesco Mari wrote:
Hi all,
some months ago we decided to drop support for Java 1.6 [1]. What about
increasing the language level of the compiler so as to be able to use the
new features in Java 7?
[1]: http://jackrabbit.markmail.org/thread/t3gzwi25tcz6masg
Well... for
+1
Best regards,
Tomek
--
Tomek Rękawek | Adobe Research | www.adobe.com
reka...@adobe.com
> On 06 Apr 2016, at 14:27, Francesco Mari wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> some months ago we decided to drop support for Java 1.6 [1]. What about
> increasing the language level of the compiler so as to be abl
+1
Regards
Julian
On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 2:27 PM, Francesco Mari wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> some months ago we decided to drop support for Java 1.6 [1]. What about
> increasing the language level of the compiler so as to be able to use the
> new features in Java 7?
>
> [1]: http://jackrabbit.markmail.
Hi all,
some months ago we decided to drop support for Java 1.6 [1]. What about
increasing the language level of the compiler so as to be able to use the
new features in Java 7?
[1]: http://jackrabbit.markmail.org/thread/t3gzwi25tcz6masg
11 matches
Mail list logo
