You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tiles.apache.org by mck <mc...@apache.org> on 2017/09/04 12:19:25 UTC
Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Are there any objections if i update the tiles master pom, and all tiles
projects, to
- build with minimum version of jdk 1.8
- compile to compiler and target 1.7
- updated all other maven plugins to latest versions.
I'll do this tomorrow if no one speaks up.
regards,
Mick
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by mck <mc...@apache.org>.
> - build with minimum version of jdk 1.8
> - compile to compiler and target 1.7
> - updated all other maven plugins to latest versions.
As the discussion remains on whether or not this warrants a major
version, I've submitted these changes and will make a test release of it
available.
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1807302
regards,
Mick
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by Wendy Smoak <ws...@gmail.com>.
What Antonio said. I was just going to check version numbers and
trunk is showing 3.1-SNAPSHOT. If you're going to require a new Java
version I think that should be a major version change, unless I'm
missing something. -Wendy
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by Brett Ryan <br...@gmail.com>.
I've never seen contention with library developers and users with regards to moving forward with platforms. I think the myth exists and only serves to stop progress moving forwards. There are still libraries holding on to 1.5 support with no good reason but to support prior users.
Never hold back moving to new platforms or upgrading dependencies. The major jump is a good visible move to those failing to read the changelog.
> On 5 Sep 2017, at 06:58, Wendy Smoak <ws...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I have not been following things that closely. I usually look to
> Apache Commons when trying to decide these things, but they don't call
> out platform level changes in their doc:
> https://commons.apache.org/releases/versioning.html
>
> But yes, I think it means Tiles 4.x if you are going to require that
> users upgrade their Java version in order to upgrade from Tiles 3.x,
> because it implies that you are going to use some new language
> features that would make Tiles "not interface compatible with the
> prior version."
>
> This has long been a point of contention, with framework developers
> wanting to use the latest and greatest, but framework users having
> more barriers to upgrading. :)
>
> --
> Wendy
>
>> On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 4:37 PM, mck <mc...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017, at 22:36, Antonio Petrelli wrote:
>>> Hello
>>> sorry to bump here, but I think a major version should be released with
>>> such an important change.
>>
>>
>> Yes, good idea.
>> If there's no other objections then I'll apply the master pom updates
>> onwards to major versions.
>>
>> That means:
>> tiles-autotag-2.0-SNAPSHOT
>> tiles-request-2.0-SNAPSHOT
>> tiles-4.0-SNAPSHOT
>>
>>
>> Antonio and Wendy, I presume that you didn't mean simply not patch
>> versions, ie bumping to
>> tiles-autotag-2.3-SNAPSHOT
>> tiles-request-1.1-SNAPSHOT
>> tiles-3.1-SNAPSHOT
>>
>> regards,
>> Mick
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by Nicolas Le Bas <ma...@nlebas.net>.
Hi all,
just trying to understand the motivation behind the change.
Currently: tiles builds with jdk 1.7 and targets 1.6.
Mck proposes two changes:
- building with 1.8: I think this does not impact end users at all, and
does not mandate a major version.
- targetting 1.7: this impacts end users, but why? Is it an option to stay
with 1.6? If not, why not be consitent and bump it all the way to 1.8. 1.9
is coming out this month and Oracle has dropped support for 1.7 two years ago.
What do you think?
Nic
On September 4, 2017 17:03:17 Wendy Smoak <ws...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have not been following things that closely. I usually look to
> Apache Commons when trying to decide these things, but they don't call
> out platform level changes in their doc:
> https://commons.apache.org/releases/versioning.html
>
> But yes, I think it means Tiles 4.x if you are going to require that
> users upgrade their Java version in order to upgrade from Tiles 3.x,
> because it implies that you are going to use some new language
> features that would make Tiles "not interface compatible with the
> prior version."
>
> This has long been a point of contention, with framework developers
> wanting to use the latest and greatest, but framework users having
> more barriers to upgrading. :)
>
> --
> Wendy
>
> On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 4:37 PM, mck <mc...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017, at 22:36, Antonio Petrelli wrote:
>>> Hello
>>> sorry to bump here, but I think a major version should be released with
>>> such an important change.
>>
>>
>> Yes, good idea.
>> If there's no other objections then I'll apply the master pom updates
>> onwards to major versions.
>>
>> That means:
>> tiles-autotag-2.0-SNAPSHOT
>> tiles-request-2.0-SNAPSHOT
>> tiles-4.0-SNAPSHOT
>>
>>
>> Antonio and Wendy, I presume that you didn't mean simply not patch
>> versions, ie bumping to
>> tiles-autotag-2.3-SNAPSHOT
>> tiles-request-1.1-SNAPSHOT
>> tiles-3.1-SNAPSHOT
>>
>> regards,
>> Mick
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by mck <mc...@apache.org>.
>
> Note (2) was already agreed upon and has been public for some time:
>
> - http://tiles.apache.org/download.html
> - http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1536392
> -
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/tiles-dev/201310.mbox/%3C1382990767.698.54.camel%40Device-D2AB6C%3E
>
Correction: those references refer to decisions around both (1) and (2)
:-)
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by Antonio Petrelli <an...@gmail.com>.
2017-09-06 15:21 GMT+02:00 Brett Ryan <br...@gmail.com>:
> sorry for my diverging
Don't feel sorry, we are exchanging thoughts :-)
Antonio
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by Brett Ryan <br...@gmail.com>.
I don't see KO that way, sorry for my diverging. KO is a competing UI binding technology to the likes of angular that allows greater flexibility. Oracle JET has shown the potential of where ko lies in providing component based plugins to the UI layer.
Sorry again :)
> On 6 Sep 2017, at 23:07, Antonio Petrelli <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 2017-09-06 14:56 GMT+02:00 mck <mc...@apache.org>:
>
>>
>> Antonio, what version of Tiles are you running on Java6?
>>
>
> 3.0.5
>
>
>> And do you have Java8 installed on your development machine/laptop?
>>
>
> Yes, but I run appserver with Hotspot 6. I use toolchains plugin to build
> to use JDK 6.
>
> For Brett, I use KO too. But again KO is somewhat a technology to add new
> concepts to old ones.
>
> Antonio
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by mck <mc...@apache.org>.
> > Antonio, what version of Tiles are you running on Java6?
> >
>
> 3.0.5
>
Ok, so despite what the downloads page says, we'll keep 3.0.x Java6
compatible.
regards,
Mick
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by Antonio Petrelli <an...@gmail.com>.
2017-09-06 14:56 GMT+02:00 mck <mc...@apache.org>:
>
> Antonio, what version of Tiles are you running on Java6?
>
3.0.5
> And do you have Java8 installed on your development machine/laptop?
>
Yes, but I run appserver with Hotspot 6. I use toolchains plugin to build
to use JDK 6.
For Brett, I use KO too. But again KO is somewhat a technology to add new
concepts to old ones.
Antonio
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by mck <mc...@apache.org>.
> Well not exactly. I know that one case is not part of statistics, however
> we use Tiles (in a Spring environment) under Java 6.
Antonio (& Wendy)'s sentiment is correct here.
As an open source project we need to honour compatibility and make api
changes according to semantic versioning rules.
A lot of production environments are old and or legacy, and security
updates required infrequently.
At the same time Brett, I do think it's time that we do AutoTag-2,
Request-2, and Tiles-4, putting them onto Java8.
It's more important at this point in time to be attracting, to our head
of development, new developers than new users. Users that need Java7
still have that option ofc w/ the current versions.
Antonio, what version of Tiles are you running on Java6?
And do you have Java8 installed on your development machine/laptop?
regards,
Mick
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by mck <mc...@apache.org>.
> People confuse frontend technologies like angular as a replacement for
> tiles instead of something to be complimented.
>
I share your opinion Brett.
I think just as much as shifts in technologies and meeting the desires
of languages and style of front-enders, we're seeing in a world of
microservices less large websites running across many verticals and eve
nwhole companies where the composition pattern really comes more into
play.
But the need is still there, if only we could better tap into this crowd
with a javascript lib that allows Tiles to work client-side, not just
breaking the client-server divide, but being more homogeneous to the
microservices world.
regards,
Mick
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by Brett Ryan <br...@gmail.com>.
I still tend to disagree. Like the rise and fall of many new technologies, tiles is still my go to for new web projects. It still handles templated composition better than any other facility available. People confuse frontend technologies like angular as a replacement for tiles instead of something to be complimented.
Tiles + knockoutjs will be my goto allowing modern frontend composition that's not locking me in to anything.
It's my opinion tiles gained some popularity with spring/mvc, but since their direction has been changing and not promoting tiles, unfortunately newcomers just don't get the exposure.
Again, my opinion, but spring (boot) is too concerned about creating a "standard" model without any effort, tiles while requiring minimal configuration, still requires thought on the developers part which is why they have lost favour of tiles.
> On 6 Sep 2017, at 22:16, Antonio Petrelli <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 2017-09-06 14:00 GMT+02:00 Brett Ryan <br...@gmail.com>:
>
>> I don't know anything about tiles usage metric, but I can only assume
>> users of tiles would look to use the it in new projects, not touch it in
>> existing or upgrade only if the maven version plugin told them a new one is
>> available.
>>
>
> Well not exactly. I know that one case is not part of statistics, however
> we use Tiles (in a Spring environment) under Java 6.
> In fact the reality is exactly the opposite: Tiles is legacy. Tiles belongs
> to server-centric web development, a thing that was cool a decade ago.
> Tiles, as we know it, probably made its time. It works with old-style
> projects with old-style environments. And yes, my current development is
> old-style :-D
>
> Just my 2 cents
>
> Antonio
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by Antonio Petrelli <an...@gmail.com>.
2017-09-06 14:00 GMT+02:00 Brett Ryan <br...@gmail.com>:
> I don't know anything about tiles usage metric, but I can only assume
> users of tiles would look to use the it in new projects, not touch it in
> existing or upgrade only if the maven version plugin told them a new one is
> available.
>
Well not exactly. I know that one case is not part of statistics, however
we use Tiles (in a Spring environment) under Java 6.
In fact the reality is exactly the opposite: Tiles is legacy. Tiles belongs
to server-centric web development, a thing that was cool a decade ago.
Tiles, as we know it, probably made its time. It works with old-style
projects with old-style environments. And yes, my current development is
old-style :-D
Just my 2 cents
Antonio
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by Brett Ryan <br...@gmail.com>.
Hell, I don't support runtimes earlier than 1.8. I have always been the opinion libraries should only support the most recent and prior runtime, that means tiles should shortly only support 1.8 and 1.9. I don't know anything about tiles usage metric, but I can only assume users of tiles would look to use the it in new projects, not touch it in existing or upgrade only if the maven version plugin told them a new one is available.
I'm not going to tell you what to do except don't make it hard on yourself especially as I've been out of work a few months and looking for a job, tiles hasn't been at the forefront of my mind :)
> On 6 Sep 2017, at 21:06, mck <mc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
>>
>> Why not stick with Java 6 using the Maven toolchain plugin?
>>
>
>
> Yes, I will do that if needed for the minor.minor versions.
> Otherwise, personally, I'm uncomfortable relying upon jenkins.
>
> Do we have developers who are building with JDK 1.6 or JDK 1.7 ?
> If we don't, and can't foresee it, why bother supporting it? It's just
> additional overhead, imho.
>
> regards,
> Mick
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by mck <mc...@apache.org>.
>
> Why not stick with Java 6 using the Maven toolchain plugin?
>
Yes, I will do that if needed for the minor.minor versions.
Otherwise, personally, I'm uncomfortable relying upon jenkins.
Do we have developers who are building with JDK 1.6 or JDK 1.7 ?
If we don't, and can't foresee it, why bother supporting it? It's just
additional overhead, imho.
regards,
Mick
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by Antonio Petrelli <an...@gmail.com>.
2017-09-06 12:55 GMT+02:00 mck <mc...@apache.org>:
>
>
>
> > So you are telling me that the only reason to change JRE requirements are
> > build tools?
>
>
> It saves us time and effort by not supporting different build
> tools/versions.
> We're only changing the JDK requirements here.
>
> The runtime environment stays at 1.7, for now.
>
Why not stick with Java 6 using the Maven toolchain plugin?
Antonio
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by mck <mc...@apache.org>.
> So you are telling me that the only reason to change JRE requirements are
> build tools?
It saves us time and effort by not supporting different build
tools/versions.
We're only changing the JDK requirements here.
The runtime environment stays at 1.7, for now.
regards,
Mick
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by Antonio Petrelli <an...@gmail.com>.
2017-09-06 12:39 GMT+02:00 mck <mc...@apache.org>:
>
> > I don't get one thing first of all. Why not moving to *all* Java 8
> > without
> > the hassle of compiling with a platform and retrofitting to another?
> > What is the purpose of such a move?
> >
>
>
> So that compatibility of build tools is narrower than that of runtime.
>
> One example is what java and maven versions apache's jenkins
> infrastructure supports imposes different constraints as to what are
> user base does.
> Also we can provide a standard secured build tool set over multiple
> branches that offer different runtime compatibilities.
> Like knowing I don't have to go find JDK1.7 to build and test before
> committing (or like having different jenkins builds to ensure we can
> build on both Java7 and Java8, etc etc)
>
>
So you are telling me that the only reason to change JRE requirements are
build tools?
I am the last one to tell you to stop (I am emeritus after all and wanting
to stay), but I suggest not to do such a move. If your reasons are better,
like moving to new Java 7 or 8 features at least for new code, I'm all for
it.
But build tools, come on...
Antonio
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by mck <mc...@apache.org>.
> I don't get one thing first of all. Why not moving to *all* Java 8
> without
> the hassle of compiling with a platform and retrofitting to another?
> What is the purpose of such a move?
>
So that compatibility of build tools is narrower than that of runtime.
One example is what java and maven versions apache's jenkins
infrastructure supports imposes different constraints as to what are
user base does.
Also we can provide a standard secured build tool set over multiple
branches that offer different runtime compatibilities.
Like knowing I don't have to go find JDK1.7 to build and test before
committing (or like having different jenkins builds to ensure we can
build on both Java7 and Java8, etc etc)
regards,
Mick
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by Antonio Petrelli <an...@gmail.com>.
2017-09-06 12:29 GMT+02:00 mck <mc...@apache.org>:
>
> > Thanks for the research and the reminder.
> >
> > Based on that, it seems to me that a minor release should be enough.
> > Perhaps 3.1.0 and not 3.0.8, but probably not 4.0.0, unless we start
> > actually developing against java 8 (i.e. lambdas, etc...).
>
>
> Wendy, Antonio, Brett: your input is valued, are you content with java8
> required for _building_ tiles for Tiles-3.1.0 ?
>
> And Java8 as a runtime requirement for Tiles-4.0.
>
Hello
I don't get one thing first of all. Why not moving to *all* Java 8 without
the hassle of compiling with a platform and retrofitting to another?
What is the purpose of such a move?
Antonio
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by mck <mc...@apache.org>.
> Thanks for the research and the reminder.
>
> Based on that, it seems to me that a minor release should be enough.
> Perhaps 3.1.0 and not 3.0.8, but probably not 4.0.0, unless we start
> actually developing against java 8 (i.e. lambdas, etc...).
Wendy, Antonio, Brett: your input is valued, are you content with java8
required for _building_ tiles for Tiles-3.1.0 ?
And Java8 as a runtime requirement for Tiles-4.0.
regards,
Mick
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by Nicolas Le Bas <ma...@nlebas.net>.
Thanks for the research and the reminder.
Based on that, it seems to me that a minor release should be enough.
Perhaps 3.1.0 and not 3.0.8, but probably not 4.0.0, unless we start
actually developing against java 8 (i.e. lambdas, etc...).
Cheers!
Nick
PS: On a side note, did we try it with java 9 so far? Not that I expect
any real problem, but some of our dependencies are really old and may
need to be revisited.
On 2017-09-04 19:22, mck wrote:
>> But yes, I think it means Tiles 4.x if you are going to require that
>> users upgrade their Java version in order to upgrade from Tiles 3.x,
>> because it implies that you are going to use some new language
>> features that would make Tiles "not interface compatible with the
>> prior version."
>>
>
> So here there's two separate proposed java bumps…
>
> 1) upgrade the jdk required to build from 1.7 to 1.8, and
> 2) bump the minimum runtime to Java7 (from Java6).
>
>
> Note (2) was already agreed upon and has been public for some time:
>
> - http://tiles.apache.org/download.html
> - http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1536392
> -
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/tiles-dev/201310.mbox/%3C1382990767.698.54.camel%40Device-D2AB6C%3E
>
>
> So the only change here really is bumping the minimum java required to
> build the project.
> My thoughts now are that this requires only a patch (minor.minor)
> version.
>
> While if we were to bump the minimum runtime to Java8, then that would
> definitely warrant the new major versions.
>
> what do folk think?
>
> regards,
> Mick
>
> ps I came across this having troubles getting Apache's Jenkins
> infrastructure to build Tiles projects on JDK1.7, of which i see haven't
> managed to fix. (thinking that `maven-toolchains-plugin` needs to be
> added to pom's that want to still build with 1.7.)
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by mck <mc...@apache.org>.
>
> But yes, I think it means Tiles 4.x if you are going to require that
> users upgrade their Java version in order to upgrade from Tiles 3.x,
> because it implies that you are going to use some new language
> features that would make Tiles "not interface compatible with the
> prior version."
>
So here there's two separate proposed java bumps…
1) upgrade the jdk required to build from 1.7 to 1.8, and
2) bump the minimum runtime to Java7 (from Java6).
Note (2) was already agreed upon and has been public for some time:
- http://tiles.apache.org/download.html
- http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1536392
-
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/tiles-dev/201310.mbox/%3C1382990767.698.54.camel%40Device-D2AB6C%3E
So the only change here really is bumping the minimum java required to
build the project.
My thoughts now are that this requires only a patch (minor.minor)
version.
While if we were to bump the minimum runtime to Java8, then that would
definitely warrant the new major versions.
what do folk think?
regards,
Mick
ps I came across this having troubles getting Apache's Jenkins
infrastructure to build Tiles projects on JDK1.7, of which i see haven't
managed to fix. (thinking that `maven-toolchains-plugin` needs to be
added to pom's that want to still build with 1.7.)
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by Wendy Smoak <ws...@gmail.com>.
I have not been following things that closely. I usually look to
Apache Commons when trying to decide these things, but they don't call
out platform level changes in their doc:
https://commons.apache.org/releases/versioning.html
But yes, I think it means Tiles 4.x if you are going to require that
users upgrade their Java version in order to upgrade from Tiles 3.x,
because it implies that you are going to use some new language
features that would make Tiles "not interface compatible with the
prior version."
This has long been a point of contention, with framework developers
wanting to use the latest and greatest, but framework users having
more barriers to upgrading. :)
--
Wendy
On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 4:37 PM, mck <mc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, 4 Sep 2017, at 22:36, Antonio Petrelli wrote:
>> Hello
>> sorry to bump here, but I think a major version should be released with
>> such an important change.
>
>
> Yes, good idea.
> If there's no other objections then I'll apply the master pom updates
> onwards to major versions.
>
> That means:
> tiles-autotag-2.0-SNAPSHOT
> tiles-request-2.0-SNAPSHOT
> tiles-4.0-SNAPSHOT
>
>
> Antonio and Wendy, I presume that you didn't mean simply not patch
> versions, ie bumping to
> tiles-autotag-2.3-SNAPSHOT
> tiles-request-1.1-SNAPSHOT
> tiles-3.1-SNAPSHOT
>
> regards,
> Mick
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by mck <mc...@apache.org>.
On Mon, 4 Sep 2017, at 22:36, Antonio Petrelli wrote:
> Hello
> sorry to bump here, but I think a major version should be released with
> such an important change.
Yes, good idea.
If there's no other objections then I'll apply the master pom updates
onwards to major versions.
That means:
tiles-autotag-2.0-SNAPSHOT
tiles-request-2.0-SNAPSHOT
tiles-4.0-SNAPSHOT
Antonio and Wendy, I presume that you didn't mean simply not patch
versions, ie bumping to
tiles-autotag-2.3-SNAPSHOT
tiles-request-1.1-SNAPSHOT
tiles-3.1-SNAPSHOT
regards,
Mick
Re: Bump Tiles to build with minimum JDK 1.8 ?
Posted by Antonio Petrelli <an...@gmail.com>.
Hello
sorry to bump here, but I think a major version should be released with
such an important change.
Antonio
2017-09-04 14:19 GMT+02:00 mck <mc...@apache.org>:
> Are there any objections if i update the tiles master pom, and all tiles
> projects, to
>
> - build with minimum version of jdk 1.8
> - compile to compiler and target 1.7
> - updated all other maven plugins to latest versions.
>
>
> I'll do this tomorrow if no one speaks up.
>
> regards,
> Mick
>