Y, totally get it.
How about shortening the EOL of Tika 2.x (and Java 8) to 6 months after the
Tika 3.x/Java 11 release?
On Thu, Sep 14, 2023 at 5:41 AM Sandeep Kulkarni
wrote:
> As a long time user of Tika, I would like to suggest Java 11 should be
> supported for 3.x. Java 17 is still quite n
: user@tika.apache.org
Cc: d...@tika.apache.org
Subject: [External] Re: [DISCUSS] Release planning for 3.x and 2.x's EOL
CAUTION: This email originated from outside the organization. Do not click
links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content
is safe. If you be
I'm all for Java17 on 3.x. (A)
David Pilato
da...@pilato.fr
06 13 03 08 41
Le 13 sept. 2023 à 21:26 +0200, Tim Allison , a écrit :
> We seem to have consensus on Java 11 for 3.x and keep Java 8 for 2.x for one
> more year. I've started the branches and started making some changes in this
> dir
Hi Tim,
I think jumping to Java 17 would be a bit much for 3.x.
I would vote for a shorter EOL for Tika 2.x
What I’ve seen is that users who are forced to continue using older versions of
Java are generally able to back port changes they need, once support is EOL. So
if there’s a critical bug
We seem to have consensus on Java 11 for 3.x and keep Java 8 for 2.x for
one more year. I've started the branches and started making some changes
in this direction.
Is it worth pushing this modernization further or faster, with either:
a) Jump to Java 17 now and keep Java 8 in 2.x for one more ye
Let's move forth!
dual branches for now: main and branch_2x
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TIKA-4127
On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 9:03 AM Maxim Solodovnik
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> from mobile (sorry for typos ;)
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 13, 2023, 11:28 Adam Rauch wrote:
>
>> +1 on requiring Java 11...
Hello,
from mobile (sorry for typos ;)
On Wed, Sep 13, 2023, 11:28 Adam Rauch wrote:
> +1 on requiring Java 11... no problem there.
>
> Can you clarify what exactly "require jakarta" means? Tika will link to
> dependencies that happen use jakarta package names, but will have no
> problem runni
+1 on requiring Java 11... no problem there.
Can you clarify what exactly "require jakarta" means? Tika will link to
dependencies that happen use jakarta package names, but will have no
problem running in a javax container (such as Tomcat 9.0.x) with javax
libraries present? Or something else?
+1 from our side, we moved to java 11 last year.
Best,
Luis
Em ter, 12 de set de 2023 19:01, Ken Krugler
escreveu:
> +1
>
> On Sep 12, 2023, at 7:56 AM, Tim Allison wrote:
>
> Sorry, let me try that again.
>
> The proposal:
> 1) start parallel main (3.x) and branch_2x branches now.
> 2) cut a
+1
> On Sep 12, 2023, at 7:56 AM, Tim Allison wrote:
>
> Sorry, let me try that again.
>
> The proposal:
> 1) start parallel main (3.x) and branch_2x branches now.
> 2) cut a first release of 3.0.0 by the end of September (maybe October) of
> 2023
> 3) Set the EOL for the 2.x branch one year a
Sorry, let me try that again.
The proposal:
1) start parallel main (3.x) and branch_2x branches now.
2) cut a first release of 3.0.0 by the end of September (maybe October) of
2023
3) Set the EOL for the 2.x branch one year after the first release of 3.0.0
-- possibly set 2.x to "security fixes on
The sooner, the better IMHO.
+1 to drop Java8 support.
David
--
David Pilato, elastic.co
Developer | Evangelist,
Le 12 sept. 2023 à 16:50 +0200, Tim Allison , a écrit :
> >If Tika users will be happy to move on and drop Java 8 and/or javax. Please
> >drop them :)))
>
> Fellow devs and broader
>If Tika users will be happy to move on and drop Java 8 and/or javax.
Please drop them :)))
Fellow devs and broader Tika community, are we ok with EOL'ing Tika 2.x and
dropping support for Java 8 and javax in September 2024?
13 matches
Mail list logo
