Le 15/01/2015 17:15, Gilles a écrit : > On Thu, 15 Jan 2015 07:52:11 -0500, Hank Grabowski wrote: >> Good call, Silviu! >> >> The most recent version of their survey of Plumbr installations (823 in >> total) was May of last year, only a few months after Java 8 came out >> (link >> below). At that time the break down was: Java 5 at 0.4%, Java 6 at 36%, >> Java 7 at 61% and Java 8 at 2.5%. I'm still looking for more data on >> this, >> but Rebel Labs has a similar article (not broken down by version) that >> showed that 65% of development was on Java 7 by May of last year too. I >> doubt the balance was Java 8 at that point, so there must be a sizable >> Java >> 6 contingent still. >> >> One other thing that came to mind with the new Java 8 features is how >> that >> is supported on Android. As far as I can tell Android KitKat, as well as >> the latest release of the Android Studio and SDK Tools doesn't support >> Java >> 8 yet. In fact, according to the Android development setup page versions >> between (and including) Gingerbread and KitKat require JDK 6, not 7. I >> haven't coded Android recently to know whether it does work on JDK 7 >> or if >> is just a requirement but it is peculiar that the main instructions call >> for JDK 7 installation and then the footnote specifically tells >> developers >> to pull a different JDK version for those earlier platforms. I can't >> tell >> where the Java 7 language features were added to Android before the >> current >> version, Lollipop. I was surprised Lollipop wasn't on their dashboard >> but >> according to the AppBrain statistics it accounts for far less than 1% of >> the installed phones. So best case scenario would be Jelly Bean >> supports 7 >> (no indication that's true), which means 85% of Android devices would be >> covered if we set a Java 7 minimum. Next best would be KitKat (more >> likely >> but not according to the install instructions) which means 39%. As for >> Java 5, that was needed for pre-Gingerbread Android OS which accounts for >> 0.5% of the market. >> >> I guess with all of that it's clear that Java 5 is unnecessarily being >> maintained at this point. Both surveys of servers and Android show far >> less than 1% usage. It seems Java 6 penetration may be still be pretty >> substantial, even conservatively at on the order of 25% (if Java 7 and 8 >> adoption picked up dramatically in 6 months after the surveys as I >> imagine >> it did to some extent). So it seems the most reasonable conservative >> play >> would be to stick with Java 6, especially if we can confirm that between >> half to 85% of Android devices can't use Java 7 language features. A >> more >> aggressive play would be to set a requirement for Java 7. Setting the >> minimum at Java 8 at this time seems overly aggressive at this time >> though. >> >> https://plumbr.eu/blog/most-popular-java-environments-in-2014 >> >> http://pages.zeroturnaround.com/Java-Tools-Technologies.html >> >> http://source.android.com/source/initializing.html >> >> https://developer.android.com/about/dashboards/index.html >> >> http://www.appbrain.com/stats/top-android-sdk-versions > > I wonder: Isn't the "end of public updates"[1] (scheduled on April of > this year for Java 7) somehow going to change that picture a lot? > If not, why?
I don't think so. If you take the use case Hank pointed out (Android phones), many people want to be able to add new apps at will, but only a smaller number will change the system completely and the JVM that comes with it. And yes, there are Android applications that use Apache Commons Math (and Orekit ;-). best regards, Luc > > > Regards, > Gilles > > [1] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html > > >> >> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 11:20 PM, Silviu Burcea >> <silviuburcea...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I think Rebel Labs or Plumbr have some metrics about JDK usage. >>> >>> On Wed, Jan 14, 2015 at 10:21 PM, Hank Grabowski >>> <h...@applieddefense.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> > Java 8 has only been out for less than a year. There is still a >>> sizable >>> > percentage of groups that have not converted up to Java 8 for myriad >>> > reasons. While I was surprised that we are requiring backwards >>> > compatibility with the ten year old Java 5 I think jumping all the >>> way to >>> > requiring Java 8 may be a bit too much of a stretch. I would vote >>> for a >>> > minimum required version of Java 7 with the ability to run in Java >>> 8. I >>> > wish I could find metrics to quantify the penetration of each of the >>> JDKs, >>> > but my gut says Java 7 would a reasonable cutoff. >>> > >>> > On Tue, Jan 13, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Gilles <gil...@harfang.homelinux.org> >>> > wrote: >>> > >>> > > Raising this issue once again. >>> > >>> Are we going to upgrade the requirement for the next major >>> release? >>> > >>> >>> > >>> [ ] Java 5 >>> > >>> [ ] Java 6 >>> > >>> [ ] Java 7 >>> > >>> [ ] Java 8 >>> > >>> [ ] Java 9 >>> > >>> >>> > >> >>> > > Counts up to now: >>> > > >>> > > Java 7 -> 2 >>> > > Java 7 or 8 -> 2 >>> > > Java 8 -> 2 >>> > > >>> > > Any more opionions? >>> > > >>> > > Gilles > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
