If someone is stuck on Maven 3.5.x for one or the other reason, they won't be able to upgrade surefire anyway... They haven't been able to update for at least a year.
They can just keep their setup. I see no reason why this would stop us from requiring Java 9+ in a later version of surefire. - Ben On 12 February 2026 01:39:11 CET, Greg Chabala <[email protected]> wrote: >> The fact no one wants to go through the hazzle of setting up toolchains >doesn't count for me. > >Have you tried using it? There are still rough edges to be found and >corrected, particularly for older JDK support. > >I'm still waiting for a release with >https://github.com/apache/maven-toolchains-plugin/issues/113 in it. > >Also, a reminder that users participating on the mailing list are a tiny >fraction of the actual user population. One cannot know what all the users >requirements are. It's reasonable to assume that some are stuck on JDK8 for >good reason, and 'JDK25 can build JDK8 conforming classfiles' is not a >solution. > >I continue to be surprised by what I discover in the wild, e.g. 'Why are >you running Maven 3.5.4?', 'Why are all your plugins 2.X versions?'. Just >getting folks to realize that upgrading the core tool does not mean they >have a 'Maven 3 build'. > >If Surefire stops working on JDK8, it should be a major version bump, just >for clarity. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
