You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tapestry.apache.org by Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo <th...@gmail.com> on 2016/01/22 14:31:51 UTC
Re: 5.5 anyone?
On Tue, 29 Dec 2015 13:41:55 -0200, Jochen Kemnade
<jo...@eddyson.de> wrote:
> Hi,
Hello, guys! I'm sorry for the very belated answer . . .
> I'd like to hear some opinions about how we should proceed with the
> Tapestry development.
>
> Which are the things we want to do for 5.5?
I'd like to see an easier way to invoke Tapestry server-side events from
JavaScript (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TAP5-2225 has me and
Jochen discussing some ideas) and better REST support (not just GET and
POST). That's my main wishes. The AJAX thing could be easily backported to
5.4.x when it's done.
> Do we want to create a 5.4 branch and start progress on 5.5 right away?
Yes. :)
> For 5.5, I'd like to require Java 8, update some libraries, maybe add
> support for Geb tests, and remove some deprecated code. That's basically
> it.
Regarding requiring Java 8 for 5.5, I think we need to discuss what are
the pros and cons and then check the cost-benefit ratio. So far, Java 6 is
required. Unfortunately, some companies are still stuck with pre-8 Java
versions, even if 7 was already end-of-lined in April 2015
(http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html). I'm not against
it. Java 8 is great. It's just about not imposing a requirement without
disregarding the consequences.
> As Java 8 and some library updates can't be done for 5.4.x,
I don't think we can.
> I'd create a 5.4 branch right now and do the updates in master.
Thanks!
> I'd prefer if we concentrated on the 5.5 release and only backport bug
> fixes to the 5.4 branch.
Some more important issues may need to be backported, like the ones Geoff
mentioned. But I guess they're bugs anyway . . .
> I hope we can get 5.5.0 out soon so we won't need to do too many 5.4.x
> releases.
Agreed.
--
Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
Tapestry, Java and Hibernate consultant and developer
http://machina.com.br
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: 5.5 anyone?
Posted by JumpStart <ge...@gmail.com>.
+1 for using Java 8 for all the reasons you mention, Jochen. Java 8 is almost 2 years old and Java 7 had its final public update almost a year ago.
+1 for supporting users on older versions, but no need to consider earlier than Java 5. Java 5 is 12 years old and had its final public update 6 years ago!
> On 26 Jan 2016, at 4:29 PM, Jochen Kemnade <jo...@eddyson.de> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I expected that someone would bring up this point. I know how hard it is to get a large company to use up-to-date software.
> However, I don't think that this should stop us from requiring Java 8. First of all, you can use a separate JRE/JDK to run your Tapestry application, you just need to set your JAVA_HOME accordingly, and second, if we switch to Java 8, that doen't mean that we force anyone to use Java 8 features, it should still compile and run Java 5 code fine. But it would give us the possibility to use Java 8 features inside Tapestry and update some outdated libraries that require it.
> By the way, if we don't switch to Java 8, I guess we don't need to branch and create a 5.5 release in the first place. I don't think that we would benefit much from requiring Java 7.
>
> Jochen
>
> Am 22.01.2016 um 16:03 schrieb Michael Gentry:
>
>> I recently worked at a place (hi Bob!) that finally got all of their
>> developers off Java 6 (there were some stragglers due to hardware issues).
>> Given that Tapestry 5.5 won't be out for a bit, I think Java 7 as a minimum
>> would be quite acceptable to most end users and would not prohibit them
>> from using Java 8+ for their Tapestry development/deployment while still
>> supporting those "stuck" on Java 7. Generally, I think it is better for a
>> framework to support an older Java version for greater compatibility with
>> the user base, even if the majority of the user community is using a higher
>> version.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> mrg
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: 5.5 anyone?
Posted by Martin Grigorov <mg...@apache.org>.
Hi Jochen,
For Thiago's idea you can try with https://github.com/orfjackal/retrolambda.
On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Jochen Kemnade <ke...@gmail.com> wrote:
> However, I know of at least one issue that I'd like to address soon and for
> which at least my preferred solution will require Java 8 classes: The
> datefield / timezone issue (I'm currently afk so I can't look up the ID).
> I'd like to use the new date/time API for that.
>
If you use classes which are not available in older JDKs then retrolambda
won't help.
If you want to support older JDKs for this specific case you may use
http://www.threeten.org/ - same classes but in a separate library, not part
of JDK.
>
> Jochen Kemnade <ke...@gmail.com> schrieb am Di., 26. Jan. 2016 18:00:
>
> > Yes, I meant compiling for 1.8, but Thiago's idea is interesting. Can
> > default methods and lambdas actually be compiled to binary code that runs
> > on Java 7 or even 6? That would indeed be a viable option, maybe even for
> > 5.4.
> >
> > Bob Harner <bo...@gmail.com> schrieb am Di., 26. Jan. 2016 17:52:
> >
> >> I don't think Jochen was proposing compiling Tapestry to anything other
> >> that a 1.8 level, only that if Tapestry forces users to use a 1.8
> runtime
> >> then it doesn't mean they are forced to use 1.8 features.
> >>
> >> I'm +1 with 5.4 being maintained for jre 1.6 or 1.7 and Tapestry 5.5
> being
> >> for jre 1.8 users, because 1) it's a way to keep devs interested, and 2)
> >> the potential advantages of 1.8 are huge for Tapestry. One of the
> biggest
> >> would be the ability to change interfaces without breaking backward
> >> compatibility (via default methods).
> >> On Jan 26, 2016 7:32 AM, "Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo" <
> >> thiagohp@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:29:58 -0200, Jochen Kemnade <
> >> > jochen.kemnade@eddyson.de> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Hi,
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > Hi!
> >> >
> >> > I expected that someone would bring up this point. I know how hard it
> is
> >> >> to get a large company to use up-to-date software.
> >> >> However, I don't think that this should stop us from requiring Java
> 8.
> >> >> First of all, you can use a separate JRE/JDK to run your Tapestry
> >> >> application, you just need to set your JAVA_HOME accordingly, and
> >> second,
> >> >> if we switch to Java 8, that doen't mean that we force anyone to use
> >> Java 8
> >> >> features, it should still compile and run Java 5 code fine.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > But, in order to have Tapestry using Java 8 in its sources and compile
> >> to
> >> > Java 6 or 7 we will be able to use most of the new syntax, but none of
> >> the
> >> > Java 8-introduced classes and interfaces like streams. I'm not sure
> how
> >> > much we can use Java 8 in Tapestry keeping it runnable under Java 7.
> Of
> >> > course, this is someone we should research.
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
> >> > Tapestry, Java and Hibernate consultant and developer
> >> > http://machina.com.br
> >> >
> >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
>
Re: 5.5 anyone?
Posted by Jochen Kemnade <ke...@gmail.com>.
However, I know of at least one issue that I'd like to address soon and for
which at least my preferred solution will require Java 8 classes: The
datefield / timezone issue (I'm currently afk so I can't look up the ID).
I'd like to use the new date/time API for that.
Jochen Kemnade <ke...@gmail.com> schrieb am Di., 26. Jan. 2016 18:00:
> Yes, I meant compiling for 1.8, but Thiago's idea is interesting. Can
> default methods and lambdas actually be compiled to binary code that runs
> on Java 7 or even 6? That would indeed be a viable option, maybe even for
> 5.4.
>
> Bob Harner <bo...@gmail.com> schrieb am Di., 26. Jan. 2016 17:52:
>
>> I don't think Jochen was proposing compiling Tapestry to anything other
>> that a 1.8 level, only that if Tapestry forces users to use a 1.8 runtime
>> then it doesn't mean they are forced to use 1.8 features.
>>
>> I'm +1 with 5.4 being maintained for jre 1.6 or 1.7 and Tapestry 5.5 being
>> for jre 1.8 users, because 1) it's a way to keep devs interested, and 2)
>> the potential advantages of 1.8 are huge for Tapestry. One of the biggest
>> would be the ability to change interfaces without breaking backward
>> compatibility (via default methods).
>> On Jan 26, 2016 7:32 AM, "Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo" <
>> thiagohp@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:29:58 -0200, Jochen Kemnade <
>> > jochen.kemnade@eddyson.de> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi,
>> >>
>> >
>> > Hi!
>> >
>> > I expected that someone would bring up this point. I know how hard it is
>> >> to get a large company to use up-to-date software.
>> >> However, I don't think that this should stop us from requiring Java 8.
>> >> First of all, you can use a separate JRE/JDK to run your Tapestry
>> >> application, you just need to set your JAVA_HOME accordingly, and
>> second,
>> >> if we switch to Java 8, that doen't mean that we force anyone to use
>> Java 8
>> >> features, it should still compile and run Java 5 code fine.
>> >>
>> >
>> > But, in order to have Tapestry using Java 8 in its sources and compile
>> to
>> > Java 6 or 7 we will be able to use most of the new syntax, but none of
>> the
>> > Java 8-introduced classes and interfaces like streams. I'm not sure how
>> > much we can use Java 8 in Tapestry keeping it runnable under Java 7. Of
>> > course, this is someone we should research.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
>> > Tapestry, Java and Hibernate consultant and developer
>> > http://machina.com.br
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>> >
>> >
>>
>
Re: 5.5 anyone?
Posted by Jochen Kemnade <ke...@gmail.com>.
Yes, I meant compiling for 1.8, but Thiago's idea is interesting. Can
default methods and lambdas actually be compiled to binary code that runs
on Java 7 or even 6? That would indeed be a viable option, maybe even for
5.4.
Bob Harner <bo...@gmail.com> schrieb am Di., 26. Jan. 2016 17:52:
> I don't think Jochen was proposing compiling Tapestry to anything other
> that a 1.8 level, only that if Tapestry forces users to use a 1.8 runtime
> then it doesn't mean they are forced to use 1.8 features.
>
> I'm +1 with 5.4 being maintained for jre 1.6 or 1.7 and Tapestry 5.5 being
> for jre 1.8 users, because 1) it's a way to keep devs interested, and 2)
> the potential advantages of 1.8 are huge for Tapestry. One of the biggest
> would be the ability to change interfaces without breaking backward
> compatibility (via default methods).
> On Jan 26, 2016 7:32 AM, "Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo" <
> thiagohp@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:29:58 -0200, Jochen Kemnade <
> > jochen.kemnade@eddyson.de> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >>
> >
> > Hi!
> >
> > I expected that someone would bring up this point. I know how hard it is
> >> to get a large company to use up-to-date software.
> >> However, I don't think that this should stop us from requiring Java 8.
> >> First of all, you can use a separate JRE/JDK to run your Tapestry
> >> application, you just need to set your JAVA_HOME accordingly, and
> second,
> >> if we switch to Java 8, that doen't mean that we force anyone to use
> Java 8
> >> features, it should still compile and run Java 5 code fine.
> >>
> >
> > But, in order to have Tapestry using Java 8 in its sources and compile to
> > Java 6 or 7 we will be able to use most of the new syntax, but none of
> the
> > Java 8-introduced classes and interfaces like streams. I'm not sure how
> > much we can use Java 8 in Tapestry keeping it runnable under Java 7. Of
> > course, this is someone we should research.
> >
> > --
> > Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
> > Tapestry, Java and Hibernate consultant and developer
> > http://machina.com.br
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: 5.5 anyone?
Posted by Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo <th...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, 13 Apr 2016 02:46:47 -0300, Jochen Kemnade <ke...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Sure, just go ahead. It doesn't look as if we're going to need another
> 5.4.x anyway.
Considering 5.5 will require Java 8, I'm planning to backport to 5.4 as
much as possible from 5.5.
--
Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
Tapestry, Java and Hibernate consultant and developer
http://machina.com.br
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: 5.5 anyone?
Posted by Jochen Kemnade <ke...@gmail.com>.
Sure, just go ahead. It doesn't look as if we're going to need another
5.4.x anyway.
Jochen
Kalle Korhonen <ka...@gmail.com> schrieb am Mi., 13. Apr. 2016,
06:40:
> Hey Jochen, I see we might not be fully done with the 5.4.1 release yet but
> would it be ok to branch out 5.4.x? Looks like I got some free time in my
> hands in the coming weeks so I can set up 5.5 for the master and start the
> work on migrating jpa-transactions.
>
> Kalle
>
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo <
> thiagohp@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 19:12:30 -0300, Kalle Korhonen <
> > kalle.o.korhonen@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Now that 5.4.1 is out, it might be a good time to move ahead with this
> >> plan, create a branch for 5.4.x and reserve the master for 5.5
> development
> >> with Java 8. I'm much more concerned with degradation of the test suite
> >> (since the tests aren't being run until we can upgrade Selenium) than
> >> merging/backporting everything from 5.5 to 5.4.
> >>
> >
> > +1
> >
> >
> >> Kalle
> >>
> >> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 4:28 AM, Bob Harner <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> I'd say just proceed. I don't think a vote is required, especially since
> >>> there has been more than a month of discussion and no real objections.
> >>> On Feb 2, 2016 6:31 AM, "Jochen Kemnade" <jo...@eddyson.de>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> > I'm +1 with 5.4 being maintained for jre 1.6 or 1.7 and Tapestry 5.5
> >>> being
> >>> >> for jre 1.8 users
> >>> >>
> >>> >
> >>> > Of course, that means that someone will need to maintain it. I'm not
> >>> > overly confident that we are going to be able to maintain two release
> >>> > branches.
> >>> >
> >>> > So, what do we do now? Do we need a vote?
> >>> >
> >>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> >>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >>> >
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> > --
> > Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
> > Tapestry, Java and Hibernate consultant and developer
> > http://machina.com.br
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: 5.5 anyone?
Posted by Kalle Korhonen <ka...@gmail.com>.
Hey Jochen, I see we might not be fully done with the 5.4.1 release yet but
would it be ok to branch out 5.4.x? Looks like I got some free time in my
hands in the coming weeks so I can set up 5.5 for the master and start the
work on migrating jpa-transactions.
Kalle
On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 2:59 PM, Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo <
thiagohp@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 19:12:30 -0300, Kalle Korhonen <
> kalle.o.korhonen@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Now that 5.4.1 is out, it might be a good time to move ahead with this
>> plan, create a branch for 5.4.x and reserve the master for 5.5 development
>> with Java 8. I'm much more concerned with degradation of the test suite
>> (since the tests aren't being run until we can upgrade Selenium) than
>> merging/backporting everything from 5.5 to 5.4.
>>
>
> +1
>
>
>> Kalle
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 4:28 AM, Bob Harner <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I'd say just proceed. I don't think a vote is required, especially since
>>> there has been more than a month of discussion and no real objections.
>>> On Feb 2, 2016 6:31 AM, "Jochen Kemnade" <jo...@eddyson.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > I'm +1 with 5.4 being maintained for jre 1.6 or 1.7 and Tapestry 5.5
>>> being
>>> >> for jre 1.8 users
>>> >>
>>> >
>>> > Of course, that means that someone will need to maintain it. I'm not
>>> > overly confident that we are going to be able to maintain two release
>>> > branches.
>>> >
>>> > So, what do we do now? Do we need a vote?
>>> >
>>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>
> --
> Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
> Tapestry, Java and Hibernate consultant and developer
> http://machina.com.br
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
Re: 5.5 anyone?
Posted by Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo <th...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 19:12:30 -0300, Kalle Korhonen
<ka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Now that 5.4.1 is out, it might be a good time to move ahead with this
> plan, create a branch for 5.4.x and reserve the master for 5.5
> development
> with Java 8. I'm much more concerned with degradation of the test suite
> (since the tests aren't being run until we can upgrade Selenium) than
> merging/backporting everything from 5.5 to 5.4.
+1
>
> Kalle
>
> On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 4:28 AM, Bob Harner <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'd say just proceed. I don't think a vote is required, especially since
>> there has been more than a month of discussion and no real objections.
>> On Feb 2, 2016 6:31 AM, "Jochen Kemnade" <jo...@eddyson.de>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > I'm +1 with 5.4 being maintained for jre 1.6 or 1.7 and Tapestry 5.5
>> being
>> >> for jre 1.8 users
>> >>
>> >
>> > Of course, that means that someone will need to maintain it. I'm not
>> > overly confident that we are going to be able to maintain two release
>> > branches.
>> >
>> > So, what do we do now? Do we need a vote?
>> >
>> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>> >
>> >
>>
--
Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
Tapestry, Java and Hibernate consultant and developer
http://machina.com.br
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: 5.5 anyone?
Posted by Kalle Korhonen <ka...@gmail.com>.
Now that 5.4.1 is out, it might be a good time to move ahead with this
plan, create a branch for 5.4.x and reserve the master for 5.5 development
with Java 8. I'm much more concerned with degradation of the test suite
(since the tests aren't being run until we can upgrade Selenium) than
merging/backporting everything from 5.5 to 5.4.
Kalle
On Tue, Feb 2, 2016 at 4:28 AM, Bob Harner <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd say just proceed. I don't think a vote is required, especially since
> there has been more than a month of discussion and no real objections.
> On Feb 2, 2016 6:31 AM, "Jochen Kemnade" <jo...@eddyson.de>
> wrote:
>
> > I'm +1 with 5.4 being maintained for jre 1.6 or 1.7 and Tapestry 5.5
> being
> >> for jre 1.8 users
> >>
> >
> > Of course, that means that someone will need to maintain it. I'm not
> > overly confident that we are going to be able to maintain two release
> > branches.
> >
> > So, what do we do now? Do we need a vote?
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: 5.5 anyone?
Posted by Bob Harner <bo...@gmail.com>.
I'd say just proceed. I don't think a vote is required, especially since
there has been more than a month of discussion and no real objections.
On Feb 2, 2016 6:31 AM, "Jochen Kemnade" <jo...@eddyson.de> wrote:
> I'm +1 with 5.4 being maintained for jre 1.6 or 1.7 and Tapestry 5.5 being
>> for jre 1.8 users
>>
>
> Of course, that means that someone will need to maintain it. I'm not
> overly confident that we are going to be able to maintain two release
> branches.
>
> So, what do we do now? Do we need a vote?
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
Re: 5.5 anyone?
Posted by Jochen Kemnade <jo...@eddyson.de>.
> I'm +1 with 5.4 being maintained for jre 1.6 or 1.7 and Tapestry 5.5 being
> for jre 1.8 users
Of course, that means that someone will need to maintain it. I'm not
overly confident that we are going to be able to maintain two release
branches.
So, what do we do now? Do we need a vote?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: 5.5 anyone?
Posted by Kalle Korhonen <ka...@gmail.com>.
Having had the luxury of using Java 8 now for a few months in a new green
field project, I fully agree we should go for Java 8 in T5.5. At times,
this version of Java almost feels like a modern language ;) T5.4 is
perfectly fine alternative for those who are not ready to move onto Java 8
and in general, I doubt that there are that many Tapestry users who
couldn't or wouldn't be willing to use the latest and greatest. For better
or worse, Tapestry doesn't quite have the penetration in large
organizations that tend to be more conservative.
On a separate note, I'd like to consider including Dmitry Gusev's excellent
jpa-transactions (https://github.com/satago/tapestry-jpa-transactions) into
T5.5 core. It's a drop-in replacement under Apache license so there
shouldn't be a problem. I'm willing to work on it.
Kalle
On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 4:14 AM, Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo <
thiagohp@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:51:51 -0200, Bob Harner <bo...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> I don't think Jochen was proposing compiling Tapestry to anything other
>> that a 1.8 level, only that if Tapestry forces users to use a 1.8 runtime
>> then it doesn't mean they are forced to use 1.8 features.
>>
>
> Oh, I see that now. I didn't interpret it that way.
> But, if we're going to force users to use a 1.8 runtime, I don't see the
> point of not using everything it provides. If someone is already using Java
> 8, I'd expect them to use the full set of features of the language.
>
> I'm +1 with 5.4 being maintained for jre 1.6 or 1.7 and Tapestry 5.5 being
>> for jre 1.8 users, because 1) it's a way to keep devs interested,
>>
>
> I didn't think about this before. Good catch, Bob! I agree with you.
>
> and 2)
>> the potential advantages of 1.8 are huge for Tapestry. One of the biggest
>> would be the ability to change interfaces without breaking backward
>> compatibility (via default methods).
>>
>
> Agreed. Another thing you've thought and I didn't, Bob. You're making me
> feel embarrassed! hehehe
>
>
> --
> Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
> Tapestry, Java and Hibernate consultant and developer
> http://machina.com.br
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
Re: 5.5 anyone?
Posted by Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo <th...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 14:51:51 -0200, Bob Harner <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't think Jochen was proposing compiling Tapestry to anything other
> that a 1.8 level, only that if Tapestry forces users to use a 1.8 runtime
> then it doesn't mean they are forced to use 1.8 features.
Oh, I see that now. I didn't interpret it that way.
But, if we're going to force users to use a 1.8 runtime, I don't see the
point of not using everything it provides. If someone is already using
Java 8, I'd expect them to use the full set of features of the language.
> I'm +1 with 5.4 being maintained for jre 1.6 or 1.7 and Tapestry 5.5
> being for jre 1.8 users, because 1) it's a way to keep devs interested,
I didn't think about this before. Good catch, Bob! I agree with you.
> and 2)
> the potential advantages of 1.8 are huge for Tapestry. One of the biggest
> would be the ability to change interfaces without breaking backward
> compatibility (via default methods).
Agreed. Another thing you've thought and I didn't, Bob. You're making me
feel embarrassed! hehehe
--
Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
Tapestry, Java and Hibernate consultant and developer
http://machina.com.br
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: 5.5 anyone?
Posted by Bob Harner <bo...@gmail.com>.
I don't think Jochen was proposing compiling Tapestry to anything other
that a 1.8 level, only that if Tapestry forces users to use a 1.8 runtime
then it doesn't mean they are forced to use 1.8 features.
I'm +1 with 5.4 being maintained for jre 1.6 or 1.7 and Tapestry 5.5 being
for jre 1.8 users, because 1) it's a way to keep devs interested, and 2)
the potential advantages of 1.8 are huge for Tapestry. One of the biggest
would be the ability to change interfaces without breaking backward
compatibility (via default methods).
On Jan 26, 2016 7:32 AM, "Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo" <th...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:29:58 -0200, Jochen Kemnade <
> jochen.kemnade@eddyson.de> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>>
>
> Hi!
>
> I expected that someone would bring up this point. I know how hard it is
>> to get a large company to use up-to-date software.
>> However, I don't think that this should stop us from requiring Java 8.
>> First of all, you can use a separate JRE/JDK to run your Tapestry
>> application, you just need to set your JAVA_HOME accordingly, and second,
>> if we switch to Java 8, that doen't mean that we force anyone to use Java 8
>> features, it should still compile and run Java 5 code fine.
>>
>
> But, in order to have Tapestry using Java 8 in its sources and compile to
> Java 6 or 7 we will be able to use most of the new syntax, but none of the
> Java 8-introduced classes and interfaces like streams. I'm not sure how
> much we can use Java 8 in Tapestry keeping it runnable under Java 7. Of
> course, this is someone we should research.
>
> --
> Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
> Tapestry, Java and Hibernate consultant and developer
> http://machina.com.br
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
>
>
Re: 5.5 anyone?
Posted by Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo <th...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, 26 Jan 2016 06:29:58 -0200, Jochen Kemnade
<jo...@eddyson.de> wrote:
> Hi,
Hi!
> I expected that someone would bring up this point. I know how hard it is
> to get a large company to use up-to-date software.
> However, I don't think that this should stop us from requiring Java 8.
> First of all, you can use a separate JRE/JDK to run your Tapestry
> application, you just need to set your JAVA_HOME accordingly, and
> second, if we switch to Java 8, that doen't mean that we force anyone to
> use Java 8 features, it should still compile and run Java 5 code fine.
But, in order to have Tapestry using Java 8 in its sources and compile to
Java 6 or 7 we will be able to use most of the new syntax, but none of the
Java 8-introduced classes and interfaces like streams. I'm not sure how
much we can use Java 8 in Tapestry keeping it runnable under Java 7. Of
course, this is someone we should research.
--
Thiago H. de Paula Figueiredo
Tapestry, Java and Hibernate consultant and developer
http://machina.com.br
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: 5.5 anyone?
Posted by Jochen Kemnade <jo...@eddyson.de>.
Hi,
I expected that someone would bring up this point. I know how hard it is
to get a large company to use up-to-date software.
However, I don't think that this should stop us from requiring Java 8.
First of all, you can use a separate JRE/JDK to run your Tapestry
application, you just need to set your JAVA_HOME accordingly, and
second, if we switch to Java 8, that doen't mean that we force anyone to
use Java 8 features, it should still compile and run Java 5 code fine.
But it would give us the possibility to use Java 8 features inside
Tapestry and update some outdated libraries that require it.
By the way, if we don't switch to Java 8, I guess we don't need to
branch and create a 5.5 release in the first place. I don't think that
we would benefit much from requiring Java 7.
Jochen
Am 22.01.2016 um 16:03 schrieb Michael Gentry:
> I recently worked at a place (hi Bob!) that finally got all of their
> developers off Java 6 (there were some stragglers due to hardware issues).
> Given that Tapestry 5.5 won't be out for a bit, I think Java 7 as a minimum
> would be quite acceptable to most end users and would not prohibit them
> from using Java 8+ for their Tapestry development/deployment while still
> supporting those "stuck" on Java 7. Generally, I think it is better for a
> framework to support an older Java version for greater compatibility with
> the user base, even if the majority of the user community is using a higher
> version.
>
> Thanks,
>
> mrg
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tapestry.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tapestry.apache.org
Re: 5.5 anyone?
Posted by Michael Gentry <mg...@masslight.net>.
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo <
thiagohp@gmail.com> wrote:
> Regarding requiring Java 8 for 5.5, I think we need to discuss what are
> the pros and cons and then check the cost-benefit ratio. So far, Java 6 is
> required. Unfortunately, some companies are still stuck with pre-8 Java
> versions, even if 7 was already end-of-lined in April 2015 (
> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html). I'm not against
> it. Java 8 is great. It's just about not imposing a requirement without
> disregarding the consequences.
I recently worked at a place (hi Bob!) that finally got all of their
developers off Java 6 (there were some stragglers due to hardware issues).
Given that Tapestry 5.5 won't be out for a bit, I think Java 7 as a minimum
would be quite acceptable to most end users and would not prohibit them
from using Java 8+ for their Tapestry development/deployment while still
supporting those "stuck" on Java 7. Generally, I think it is better for a
framework to support an older Java version for greater compatibility with
the user base, even if the majority of the user community is using a higher
version.
Thanks,
mrg