Ideally, if we can just keep various branches around in releasable states, then we can keep old dbcp 2.x.* maintenance releases moving forward. Based on my experiences trying to release this module before, though, I think that process would need to be streamlined and backported.
On 17 June 2018 at 07:58, sebb <[email protected]> wrote: > On 16 June 2018 at 22:41, Gary Gregory <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello Mark and all, > > > > Thank you for the heads up on the Tomcat plans. > > > > Asking DBCP to stay on Java 7 for 4-5 years is insane IMO, and it > certainly > > is not going to attract anyone to maintain and grow this component (IMO > > again.) If that is a set of handcuffs you want to live with, then by all > > means ;-) > > > > I am sure there is nothing stopping anyone at Apache to keep patches > coming > > to the DBCP 2.4.x line. I plan on keeping the release train going for > many > > Commons component, so I am happy to release DBCP at will. > > > > You will notice that > > https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-dbcp/download_dbcp.cgi > presents > > no less than tree different versions of DBCP for different antique Java > > platforms. We are just going to make that list one deeper. > > I think we can now drop support for JDBC 3 and JDBC 4 (Java 6) > That leaves only JDBC 4.1 (Java 7.0) as a current release. > > Is that really too much to continue to support? > > > Again, patches are more than welcome. And do feel free to call for a RC > or > > RM it yourself ;-) > > > > Gary > > > > > > On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 2:34 PM Mark Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> On 16/06/18 21:14, Matt Sicker wrote: > >> > On 16 June 2018 at 14:11, Mark Thomas <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > > >> >> What is driving the desire to move to Java 8? > >> >> > >> > > >> > What's driving the desire to maintain support for a seven year old > >> release > >> > of Java which is not supported without paying large sums of money to > >> > Oracle? > >> > >> As I said, Tomcat 8 which has at least another 4 to 5 years of life in > >> it, depends on DBCP 2 and has a specification mandated requirement to > >> maintain compatibility with Java 7. > >> > >> There are ways the Tomcat community could work around this. Because Java > >> 7 is EOL does not - on its own - strike me as a sufficiently good reason > >> to create hassle for another ASF community. > >> > >> If there are new features in Java 8 we want to take advantage of or an > >> update to the JDBC API that we want to support then fair enough. Those > >> are good reasons but I'd like to see them explicitly articulated. > >> > >> Mark > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > >> > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > -- Matt Sicker <[email protected]>
