I do not think we should talk about future plans in the release notes for
3.5.
Gary
On Sep 21, 2016 2:58 PM, "Stian Soiland-Reyes" wrote:
> +1 - could we even mention this in the release notes for 3.5 and 3.6?
>
> Something like:
>
> > Commons Lang 3.5.x is planned to be the last minor version
+1 - could we even mention this in the release notes for 3.5 and 3.6?
Something like:
> Commons Lang 3.5.x is planned to be the last minor version series that
> support Java 6; future versions will target Java 7 and Java 8.
> Commons Lang 3.6.x is planned to be the last minor version series tha
I'd like to propose an orderly migration assume BC is preserved:
- Release 3.5 RC as scheduled this weekend
- Release 3.6 with Java 7 changes
- Release 3.7 with Java 8 changes
This will give us an opportunity to do some Java 7 work and put that out
without leaving Java 7-only folks out of the pic
+1 to be brave and make Lang 3.6 be Java 8, so Lambda helpers can join
here. I have a couple of Stream helpers that could also fit in there.
On 21 September 2016 at 18:19, Gary Gregory wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 8:04 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Jörg Schaible schrieb am Mi.
On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 8:04 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Jörg Schaible schrieb am Mi., 21. Sep.
> 2016 um 16:55 Uhr:
>
> > Jan Matèrne (jhm) wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >> We could also have Lamda utility classes in [lang], the classes would
> > >> target Java 8 while the other classes would r
On Wed, 21 Sep 2016 15:04:12 +, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
Hi,
Jörg Schaible schrieb am Mi., 21.
Sep.
2016 um 16:55 Uhr:
Jan Matèrne (jhm) wrote:
>
>> We could also have Lamda utility classes in [lang], the classes
would
>> target Java 8 while the other classes would remain at the Java 6
Hi,
Jörg Schaible schrieb am Mi., 21. Sep.
2016 um 16:55 Uhr:
> Jan Matèrne (jhm) wrote:
>
> >
> >> We could also have Lamda utility classes in [lang], the classes would
> >> target Java 8 while the other classes would remain at the Java 6 level
> >> (this implies compiling the classes separatel
Jan Matèrne (jhm) wrote:
>
>> We could also have Lamda utility classes in [lang], the classes would
>> target Java 8 while the other classes would remain at the Java 6 level
>> (this implies compiling the classes separately and recombining them in
>> the final jar).
>
> From a users point of vi
> We could also have Lamda utility classes in [lang], the classes would
> target Java 8 while the other classes would remain at the Java 6 level
> (this implies compiling the classes separately and recombining them in
> the final jar).
>From a users point of view I would search in commons-lang f
