+1 for Java 8. Gary
On Sun, Oct 28, 2018, 06:13 Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 to move to java 8, java 7 is more than outdated today even for legacy > systems > > Le dim. 28 oct. 2018 12:10, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de.invalid> a > écrit : > > > Hi folks! > > I've worked through the open POOL tickets and found a few tickets which > > would like to enhance a few of our interfaces. > > E.g. in POOL-355 we have a request to add a new method getMaxNumActive() > > to the ObjectPool interface. > > Now this would of course be a backward compatibility breaking change. If > > we would have java8 as minimum then we could easily just add a default > > method which returns -1. But since our min Java version is 1.7 we are > > doomed... > > I would love to get the deadlock fixes out with the current 1.7 > > requirement first. Because that's important to get to the people > (including > > my own customers). > > But what after that?Would this justify a commons-pool-3.0?Do we also like > > to cleanup other stuff? Or should we just raise our min Java requirement > to > > 1.8 and call it 2.7? > > I'm totally fine either way and would love to get any feedback. > > > > LieGrue,strub > > > > > > >
