Hi Elliotte, While I share the wish 1 repo = 1 JDK, I have a hard time to see how any company - including the ones you cite - can seriously bet on Java 11 today for the future (not saying it wasnt hard to reach Java 11 today but we are discussing on what we'll do tomorrow) and why it would pushback the constraint to all the related tools. Java 11 support is already EOL for most vendor until you go "premium" flavor which will likely be very few people and most of them will be able to pay somebody to backport the needed stuff in custom distro of their work if needed anyday so not sure we should consider it. On the other side most libraries tend to move forward faster and if you like big ones, i'll take Spring or JakartaEE as an example - big user base rather than big company$ ;) - and they don't even support Java 11 anymore. So we go with Java 11 with our Maven 4 we'll likely be off most of our users, increase potential contributors work (think PR and needed builds to pass) without any actual gain for the project overall except maybe a few big vendors with part of them already migrated out of maven or even building their own build system. I'm not sure I see it as a very weighty in the balance from my window. So in terms of schedule - I know, the thread about EOL and maintenance got quite closed so it will never be a thing at Maven - I think we should embrace the future and ensure we follow main practises rather than looking a few people cause we are about community more than companies.
Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> Le lun. 5 févr. 2024 à 19:56, Elliotte Rusty Harold <elh...@ibiblio.org> a écrit : > On Mon, Feb 5, 2024 at 12:01 PM Benjamin Marwell <bmarw...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Why 17? 11 is often earlier EOL'd than 8 and 17, so I see absolutely > > no advantage of going to 11: > > > > The advantage of going with 11 instead of 17 is that at least 2 really > big tech companies I could name (and who you can probably guess from > my linked in) have only recently completed their own migration to Java > 11. At least one of those two companies might still employ a PMC > member (though I haven't checked post-layoffs), maybe more than one. > Both have actively supported Maven development over the years, though > that support ebbs and flows depending on corporate priorities. > > I get the impression that folks who haven't worked in such large > mono-repos aren't aware of just how big a multi-year effort it is to > move a repo like that onto a new JDK version. And that's just the VM, > even before you allow devs to change the language level and start > using the new features and libraries. That's just the two really big > mono-repos I have personally worked in. I'm willing to bet that some > other big Java shops are in similar positions. > > Switching back and forth between JDKs for open source development is > doable but an unnecessary hassle. I've done it before, but even > switching from JDK 8 to 11 is an extra paper cut. It kills time every > time spotless fails simply because I'm using Java 8 instead of 11. > > Most importantly, it will be even harder to sell management on the > benefit of spending developer time on Maven 4 development, if it isn't > suitable for that company's own open source projects which, last I > checked, were still on Java 8. (OK, I just spot checked and the first > one I looked at is in fact still compiling for Java *1.7*, probably > because that's where their customers are). > > I'm thinking back to the projects I had to justify to management a few > years and one company back, and it definitely would have been harder > then if I had to tell them what we were contributing would only work > on Java 11 or later. Maybe today I could sell them on Java 11 (or > maybe not, if they aren't paying attention to Maven at all any more) > but Java 17 would be a non-starter. They might prefer to spend their > resources on a build tool they own, or maybe just not spend the dev > hours at all. > > tldr: every uptick in version requirements bleeds that many more > contributors out of the pool. > > -- > Elliotte Rusty Harold > elh...@ibiblio.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > >
