Thank Gary, Benedikt, Marcelo, sebb, James, Jochen, ecki, Ralph and Matt for all your input.
How about make a conservative decision: regarding the first release(1.0.0), we keep the JDK version as 1.6, and we wouldn't support JDK 1.6 for the releases after 1.0.0. Regards Dapeng -----Original Message----- From: Matt Sicker [mailto:boa...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 08, 2016 6:18 AM To: Commons Developers List Subject: Re: [crypto] On Java 6, really? I'd imagine that close to 100% of users who are on Java 6 are not upgrading anything else, either, nor would they be adding in new dependencies. Every Java 6 project I've come across lately has been in legacy maintenance mode (just like Java 6 itself). On 7 June 2016 at 16:47, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > Let's not forget that customers are paying Oracle to get Java 6 updates. > > Gary > On Jun 7, 2016 1:24 PM, "Ralph Goers" <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > > > I really don’t think the premier & extended support dates should > > really mean much, except as an indicator of how many users of that > > version might still exist. Basically, no new features are going to > > be added to Java > so I > > don’t think we should be targeting new features there either. If > > there > is a > > bug that needs to be fixed it should be possible to do it on a > > branch of the the release for that version of Java. The web site > > should clearly indicate which versions of the component support the > > appropriate Java versions. > > > > Ralph > > > > > On Jun 7, 2016, at 12:26 PM, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > I have just checked Oracle support for Java 6. > > > > > > The Support Life for Java 6 has been extended to Dec 2018 [1] I > > > think this means that there are critical systems that cannot yet > > > be updated to Java 7+. > > > > > > This does not mean that we should ensure that all Commons code > > > still works on Java 6. > > > But it should be taken into account when evaluating the pros and > > > cons of requiring a later version. > > > > > > [1] > > > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html#extended6 > > > > > > On 7 June 2016 at 20:02, Jochen Wiedmann > > > <jochen.wiedm...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > >>> Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote on Tue., 7. Juni > > >>> 2016 > > >>> > > >>>> Are we really starting a new component on a dead platform like > > >>>> Java > 6? > > >> > > >> > > >> You are, of course, right, that the component is more than > > >> welcome to use another version. OTOH, given our latest > > >> experiences: Is this really someting, that we should care for? > > >> IMO, let the component have, whatever they want. > > >> > > >> Jochen > > >> > > >> ----------------------------------------------------------------- > > >> ---- 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- > > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > > > > > -- Matt Sicker <boa...@gmail.com>
