That is a fair point. And I concur, that until core ups its minimum JRE requirement, compiler shouldn't move past that...
Raises the question should core up to 1.6... I don't see a pressing need yet... Lambdas are not until 1.8, and we don't do the crazy generics stuff that, for example, forced Jenkins to require 1.6 to build. So without a pressing need, I think core should stay on 1.5 for now On 29 November 2012 10:39, Jochen Wiedmann <jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com>wrote: > Leaving aside questions of compatibility, Java 7 as compiler default would > be a poor choice. After all, that would require JRE 7 as a standard for > running Maven, or using one of the Eclipse compilers. Otherwise, that would > be unsupported by the compiler. > > > > On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 8:43 PM, Ron Wheeler < > rwhee...@artifact-software.com > > wrote: > > > +1 > > > > On 28/11/2012 1:36 PM, Mark Derricutt wrote: > > > >> Now that Oracle are controlling Java on OSX we can no longer "blame > >> Apple" - I'd love to see the default become Java 7 now. > >> > >> And if one needs to lock down to the older versions, lock them down. > >> > >> > >> On 29/11/2012, at 7:07 AM, Curtis Rueden <ctrue...@wisc.edu> wrote: > >> > >> Good to know that Maven is now only 8 years behind. > >>>> > >>> I blame Apple. > >>> > >> > >> > > > > -- > > Ron Wheeler > > President > > Artifact Software Inc > > email: rwhee...@artifact-software.com > > skype: ronaldmwheeler > > phone: 866-970-2435, ext 102 > > > > > > ------------------------------**------------------------------**--------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@maven.**apache.org< > users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org> > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > -- > The best argument for celibacy is that the clergy will sooner or later > become extinct. >
