On 7 August 2013 14:02, Rory O'Farrell <ofarr...@iol.ie> wrote: > On Wed, 7 Aug 2013 07:54:55 -0400 > Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 7, 2013 at 3:44 AM, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann > > <orwittm...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I would like to discuss here, if we drop the support for Java 5 and > Java 6 > > > for AOO installation on Windows. > > > Important note for discussion: it is all about platform Windows. > > > > > > On my work to update the AOO build environment for Windows I > recognized that > > > it is hard to get an official JDK 1.5 (Java 5) or JDK 1.6 (Java 6) for > > > Windows. Thus, I decided to go with JDK 1.7. The resulting AOO > installation > > > on Windows no longer works together with an JRE 6. It does not > recognize an > > > installed JRE 6 as an valid Java runtime environment. > > > Thus, it comes into my mind to drop the support for Java 5 and Java 6 > for > > > Windows. > > > > > > > Another perspective to consider: What leads to the most secure build > > environment for our binaries? I don't think we want to ever be > > building binaries that millions of users download, that are built on a > > machine with an unsupported JRE that is no longer receiving security > > patches. A build machine should be full patched against known > > security issues. And of course it should be used only for building, > > not for daily email and web browsing. > > > > So I think we should use JDK 1.7 for our builds. If that breaks Java > > 5 and Java 6 compatibility for end users, then this is unfortunate, > > but justifiable. > > > > We'll face a similar issue of this sort in April 2014, when Windows XP > > reaches End of Support by Microsoft. Do we then continue to support > > AOO on XP? Do we test with it? Perhaps. But we certainly would not > > build our binaries on XP, right? > > > > Regards, > > > > -Rob > > > > > > > > > Some discussion already took place in the thread about my update on > the AOO > > > build environment for Windows. Here are the original statements: > > > <cite> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> From Oliver: > > >>>>> On a Windows system with JRE 6 the installation of my build does > not > > >>>>> recognize installed JRE 6 as an Java runtime environment (Menu - > Tools > > >>>>> - > > >>>>> Option - Java). This is no problem from my point of view as our > Windows > > >>>>> users should not have JRE 6 installed anymore on their systems due > to > > >>>>> its security risks. Does somebody contradicts? > > >>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> From Andrea: > > >>>> As far as I know, this would be a significant limitation. We can now > > >>>> build with Java 5, 6 or 7 and the build can work with Java 5, 6 or 7 > > >>>> (regardless of the version used for building). Restricting this > would > > >>>> require discussion, especially on less common platforms. > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> From Oliver: > > >>> I agree that it would be a restriction, but due to the security > risks of > > >>> Oracle's JRE 6 I do not think that such a restriction hurts. In > contrast > > >>> it would 'help' our Windows users to update their Java environment. > > >>> > > >>> Thus, let us start a new thread to discuss this topic. > > >> > > >> > > >> FromJürgen: > > >> we should think how relevant it is and if we have more work to support > > >> it. As Oliver pointed out, the latest security problems of Java result > > >> in probably many updated systems. I don't see that Java 5 or 6 is > > >> important in the future and we should focus on the future. > > > > > > </cite> > > > > > > My arguements for a drop of the Java 5 and Java 6 support on Windows > are: > > > - JRE 5 is quite old and no longer officially available > > > - JRE 6 is no longer officially available > > > - JRE 6 has certain security risks and the corresponding tools on > Widnows > > > are reporting to update to JRE 7 > > > - Simplify our work as we do not need to test under Windows JRE 5 and > JRE 6 > > > > > > I currently see no need to support JRE 5 or JRE 6 in our future > releases for > > > Windows. > > > > > > Let us discuss openly more Pros and Cons on this topic. > > I see no objection to future AOO releases requiring at least Java 1.7; > ideally I would wish it continued to support XP (I suppose Win 2K is too > much to hope for?). >
I am all in favour of remove java 1.5 and 1.6 from our build environment, as they are a security risk. But we should exploit if its possible to use java 1.7 for build and accept java 5,6,7 as runtime. I have looked a bit in the code (I am no java guru), and I can see the APIs differentiate. We could overcome that with a couple of if statements (testing for version), question is do we also want to force our customers to use java 1.7 ? rgds jan I. > > -- > Rory O'Farrell <ofarr...@iol.ie> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > >
