Gary, As you know Log4j has a maven module for Java 9. It contains the module-info.java file. That module compiles with Java 9 and targets Java 9 as there isn’t much point targeting anything earlier. That class files produced are then overlaid on top of the classes produced for Log4j-api, which is targeted at 1.7 and uses the 1.7 compiler. Commons Logging could do exactly the same thing and just have a maven module for the Java 9 support and then use whatever compiler it wants for the current commons logging classes.
That said, why does commons logging need to be a “real” module anyway? Ralph > On Oct 28, 2017, at 10:07 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> wrote: > > From a pragmatic POV, the oldest Java byte codes you can get Java 9 to emit > are for Java 1.6. Since we will want, I assume, to produce a module info > class in the jar, we will need to use Java 9 for that (to keep an RM's life > manageable.) > > This means to me that we should set the bar at Java 1.6 for the bare > minimum, which seams reasonable in 2017 soon to be 2018 and considering > Java 6 and 7 are EOL. > > Gary > > On Sat, Oct 28, 2017 at 10:32 AM, Benedikt Ritter <brit...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> maybe we should decide on what we want to achieve here, before I start the >> endeavor of creating an RC for such an old component. >> >> My understanding of Logging is, that it is in semi dormant mode. That we >> don’t want to add any new features and instead point users to Log4j2. Since >> Logging has a wide installation base we decided not to upgrade the Java >> version requirement and instead stay at Java 1.2 and only release super >> critical fixes/updates. >> Upgrading to Java 6 seems to contradict this plan. So where do we want to >> go with Logging? >> >> Regards, >> Benedikt >> >>> Am 28.10.2017 um 18:20 schrieb Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com>: >>> >>> That isn’t strictly true Gary, There are ways to build the module-info >> without upgrading the main code to Java 9. That said, it is a bit of a hack >> to do it. >>> >>> Ralph >>> >>>> On Oct 28, 2017, at 8:19 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>>> >>>> Let's update to at least a minimum of Java 6 such that the build can run >>>> with Java 9. Builing with Java 9 will be a requirement to add module >> info. >>>> >>>> Gary >>>> >>>> On Oct 28, 2017 01:21, "Benedikt Ritter" <brit...@apache.org> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> After I was able to update the the build to the latest parent POM, I’m >>>>> running into animal sniffer problems. The build is defined to target >> Java >>>>> 1.2 but there are classes which require later JDKs: >>>>> >>>>> - Jdk13LumberjackLogger >>>>> - Jdk14Logger >>>>> >>>>> This breaks the build because animal sniffer reports that these classes >>>>> don’t work on Java 1.2. I don’t understand how this is supposed to >> work. >>>>> Did we ship those classes and users have to decide whether they want to >>>>> load them or not depending on the JRE they are running on? Do we want >> to >>>>> exclude the two classes from animal sniffer? >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> Benedikt >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> 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 >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
