You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cxf.apache.org by Christian Schneider <ch...@die-schneider.net> on 2011/02/22 09:45:44 UTC
When do we drop Java 5 support?
Hi all,
now that camel dropped Java 5 I am asking myself when will we also drop
support for Java 5 in CXF? As CXF 2.4.0 allows some bigger changes than
a minor version we could do that in my opinion.
Christian
--
----
http://www.liquid-reality.de
Re: When do we drop Java 5 support?
Posted by Glen Mazza <gm...@talend.com>.
All true.
On 2/27/2011 7:57 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> Glen,
>
> While I'm sympathetic to your general argument, I don't think it's
> especially applicable here.
>
> Adopting 1.6 means allowing approximately 5 new functions in the
> Arrays class. (OK, a slight exaggeration.) Really, the practical
> impact of 1.6 is tiny. No one working on CXF is deprived of any
> interesting learning opportunities or functionality by continuing to
> stick to 1.5.
>
>
>
> --benson
--
Glen Mazza
Software Engineer, Talend (http://www.talend.com)
blog: http://www.jroller.com/gmazza
Re: When do we drop Java 5 support?
Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.
Glen,
While I'm sympathetic to your general argument, I don't think it's
especially applicable here.
Adopting 1.6 means allowing approximately 5 new functions in the
Arrays class. (OK, a slight exaggeration.) Really, the practical
impact of 1.6 is tiny. No one working on CXF is deprived of any
interesting learning opportunities or functionality by continuing to
stick to 1.5.
--benson
Re: When do we drop Java 5 support?
Posted by Glen Mazza <gm...@talend.com>.
I think, if only because of the nontrivial amount of upgrade work Dan
was mentioning earlier, we'll be keeping 1.5 at least for CXF 2.4.
I do have a philosophical concern about staying *too* much in the past
though. In my view, for the open source model to work, it needs to be
for the benefit of both the user community and the committers working on
it. Committers should be better skilled/better marketable as a result
of their volunteer efforts (much in the same lawyers become with pro
bono work), and if the API lags too many years behind present
technologies you end up having a smaller committer pool and hence a
less-valuable product (even if it works with older Java versions). To
give an extreme example, users who can't leave the Commodore 64 may need
to look for a commercial solution rather than us trying to recruit
committers into supporting it to their own personal detriment. Stated
another way, rather than ask "What's good for the users?" a better
question might be "What's good for the users *and* committers?"
Glen
On 2/27/2011 6:44 AM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> I am opposed to dropping 1.5. There are a surprising number of people
> out there who have barely bothered to stop requiring *1.4*. We could
> put the animal sniffer to work to help head off any unfortunate
> accidental dependencies on 1.6 APIs.
>
> On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Glen Mazza<gm...@talend.com> wrote:
>> Well, older versions of CXF--2.3.x and earlier--of course would perpetually
>> support JRE 5.0. It's just a question of moving forward, it looks like
>> right now 2.4 will still support 5.0 and maybe we'll switch to 6.0 minimum
>> in CXF 2.5. I didn't know about royalty concerns (do you have a link for
>> that--can't immediately find anything off Google), but I'm sure there would
>> also be some fears of running on an unmaintained JRE. Although some
>> wish/need to remain on JRE 5.0 (and hence CXF 2.3), there's also a
>> counterargument, that for information security reasons, newer releases of
>> CXF shouldn't allow itself to be run on unmaintained JRE's, similar to the
>> way responsible builders will not put up homes on unsafe land/foundations
>> even if business is lost as a result.
>>
>> Glen
>>
>> On 2/22/2011 9:27 PM, Fred Dushin wrote:
>>> Speaking from the field, you do not want to drop 1.5. There are
>>> organization out there that are not moving to 1.6 (or are moving very
>>> slowly) out of fear of Oracle's collecting royalties under the 1.6
>>> redistribution terms.
>>>
>>> CXF is meant to be an embedded library. If you drop support for 1.5, you
>>> will find users who will not upgrade. At a minimum, CXF should support 1.5
>>> on one of its branches.
>>>
>>> Not everyone out there has the luxury of being on the bleeding edge.
>>>
>>> -Fred
>>>
>>> On Feb 22, 2011, at 11:17 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tuesday 22 February 2011 3:45:44 AM Christian Schneider wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> now that camel dropped Java 5 I am asking myself when will we also drop
>>>>> support for Java 5 in CXF? As CXF 2.4.0 allows some bigger changes than
>>>>> a minor version we could do that in my opinion.
>>>> Well, I guess the question is: what is the cost of supporting Java 5
>>>> compared
>>>> to the cost of dropping it? For Camel, the cost was pretty high as they
>>>> had
>>>> some dependencies for various components that required Java6. Thus, you
>>>> really couldn't do complete Camel builds with Java5 anyway.
>>>>
>>>> CXF is a bit different. RIGHT NOW, we don't have anything anyplace that
>>>> requires Java 6. In generaly, the only "cost" we have is the occasional
>>>> @Override annotation that Eclipse likes to stick on everything causing a
>>>> Jenkins build break and some slight additional complexity in the poms.
>>>> Thus,
>>>> the cost of supporting Java5 for us is pretty low, right now.
>>>>
>>>> Dropping support for Java5 would cause issues with SOME people,
>>>> especially
>>>> those trying to use CXF in some of the older App servers. Also, to be
>>>> honest, the new JAX-WS and JAXB 2.2 stuff in CXF works a TON better with
>>>> Java5
>>>> than with Java6 due to the endorsed crap. Dropping support for Java5
>>>> would
>>>> mean much of the JAXWS 2.2/JAXB 2.2 would not be tested on a day to day
>>>> basis
>>>> as that stuff is currently only tested when run on Java5. Thus, there
>>>> is a
>>>> big cost of dropping it just from a testing and support standpoint.
>>>> Getting
>>>> that stuff to run on Java6 properly would likely require a lot more
>>>> configuration in the poms, updates to our plugins, likely updates to some
>>>> of
>>>> the Maven plugins, etc.... Basically, it's not easy.
>>>>
>>>> Thus, in my opinon, I don't think *right now* is the right time to drop
>>>> support for Java 5. Maybe for 2.5, but likely not for 2.4. That said,
>>>> I
>>>> could potentially be convinced either way. :-)
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Daniel Kulp
>>>> dkulp@apache.org
>>>> http://dankulp.com/blog
>>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>>
>>
--
Glen Mazza
Software Engineer, Talend (http://www.talend.com)
blog: http://www.jroller.com/gmazza
Re: When do we drop Java 5 support?
Posted by Benson Margulies <bi...@gmail.com>.
I am opposed to dropping 1.5. There are a surprising number of people
out there who have barely bothered to stop requiring *1.4*. We could
put the animal sniffer to work to help head off any unfortunate
accidental dependencies on 1.6 APIs.
On Wed, Feb 23, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Glen Mazza <gm...@talend.com> wrote:
> Well, older versions of CXF--2.3.x and earlier--of course would perpetually
> support JRE 5.0. It's just a question of moving forward, it looks like
> right now 2.4 will still support 5.0 and maybe we'll switch to 6.0 minimum
> in CXF 2.5. I didn't know about royalty concerns (do you have a link for
> that--can't immediately find anything off Google), but I'm sure there would
> also be some fears of running on an unmaintained JRE. Although some
> wish/need to remain on JRE 5.0 (and hence CXF 2.3), there's also a
> counterargument, that for information security reasons, newer releases of
> CXF shouldn't allow itself to be run on unmaintained JRE's, similar to the
> way responsible builders will not put up homes on unsafe land/foundations
> even if business is lost as a result.
>
> Glen
>
> On 2/22/2011 9:27 PM, Fred Dushin wrote:
>>
>> Speaking from the field, you do not want to drop 1.5. There are
>> organization out there that are not moving to 1.6 (or are moving very
>> slowly) out of fear of Oracle's collecting royalties under the 1.6
>> redistribution terms.
>>
>> CXF is meant to be an embedded library. If you drop support for 1.5, you
>> will find users who will not upgrade. At a minimum, CXF should support 1.5
>> on one of its branches.
>>
>> Not everyone out there has the luxury of being on the bleeding edge.
>>
>> -Fred
>>
>> On Feb 22, 2011, at 11:17 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday 22 February 2011 3:45:44 AM Christian Schneider wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi all,
>>>>
>>>> now that camel dropped Java 5 I am asking myself when will we also drop
>>>> support for Java 5 in CXF? As CXF 2.4.0 allows some bigger changes than
>>>> a minor version we could do that in my opinion.
>>>
>>> Well, I guess the question is: what is the cost of supporting Java 5
>>> compared
>>> to the cost of dropping it? For Camel, the cost was pretty high as they
>>> had
>>> some dependencies for various components that required Java6. Thus, you
>>> really couldn't do complete Camel builds with Java5 anyway.
>>>
>>> CXF is a bit different. RIGHT NOW, we don't have anything anyplace that
>>> requires Java 6. In generaly, the only "cost" we have is the occasional
>>> @Override annotation that Eclipse likes to stick on everything causing a
>>> Jenkins build break and some slight additional complexity in the poms.
>>> Thus,
>>> the cost of supporting Java5 for us is pretty low, right now.
>>>
>>> Dropping support for Java5 would cause issues with SOME people,
>>> especially
>>> those trying to use CXF in some of the older App servers. Also, to be
>>> honest, the new JAX-WS and JAXB 2.2 stuff in CXF works a TON better with
>>> Java5
>>> than with Java6 due to the endorsed crap. Dropping support for Java5
>>> would
>>> mean much of the JAXWS 2.2/JAXB 2.2 would not be tested on a day to day
>>> basis
>>> as that stuff is currently only tested when run on Java5. Thus, there
>>> is a
>>> big cost of dropping it just from a testing and support standpoint.
>>> Getting
>>> that stuff to run on Java6 properly would likely require a lot more
>>> configuration in the poms, updates to our plugins, likely updates to some
>>> of
>>> the Maven plugins, etc.... Basically, it's not easy.
>>>
>>> Thus, in my opinon, I don't think *right now* is the right time to drop
>>> support for Java 5. Maybe for 2.5, but likely not for 2.4. That said,
>>> I
>>> could potentially be convinced either way. :-)
>>>
>>> --
>>> Daniel Kulp
>>> dkulp@apache.org
>>> http://dankulp.com/blog
>>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
>
>
>
Re: When do we drop Java 5 support?
Posted by Glen Mazza <gm...@talend.com>.
Well, older versions of CXF--2.3.x and earlier--of course would
perpetually support JRE 5.0. It's just a question of moving forward, it
looks like right now 2.4 will still support 5.0 and maybe we'll switch
to 6.0 minimum in CXF 2.5. I didn't know about royalty concerns (do
you have a link for that--can't immediately find anything off Google),
but I'm sure there would also be some fears of running on an
unmaintained JRE. Although some wish/need to remain on JRE 5.0 (and
hence CXF 2.3), there's also a counterargument, that for information
security reasons, newer releases of CXF shouldn't allow itself to be run
on unmaintained JRE's, similar to the way responsible builders will not
put up homes on unsafe land/foundations even if business is lost as a
result.
Glen
On 2/22/2011 9:27 PM, Fred Dushin wrote:
> Speaking from the field, you do not want to drop 1.5. There are organization out there that are not moving to 1.6 (or are moving very slowly) out of fear of Oracle's collecting royalties under the 1.6 redistribution terms.
>
> CXF is meant to be an embedded library. If you drop support for 1.5, you will find users who will not upgrade. At a minimum, CXF should support 1.5 on one of its branches.
>
> Not everyone out there has the luxury of being on the bleeding edge.
>
> -Fred
>
> On Feb 22, 2011, at 11:17 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday 22 February 2011 3:45:44 AM Christian Schneider wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> now that camel dropped Java 5 I am asking myself when will we also drop
>>> support for Java 5 in CXF? As CXF 2.4.0 allows some bigger changes than
>>> a minor version we could do that in my opinion.
>> Well, I guess the question is: what is the cost of supporting Java 5 compared
>> to the cost of dropping it? For Camel, the cost was pretty high as they had
>> some dependencies for various components that required Java6. Thus, you
>> really couldn't do complete Camel builds with Java5 anyway.
>>
>> CXF is a bit different. RIGHT NOW, we don't have anything anyplace that
>> requires Java 6. In generaly, the only "cost" we have is the occasional
>> @Override annotation that Eclipse likes to stick on everything causing a
>> Jenkins build break and some slight additional complexity in the poms. Thus,
>> the cost of supporting Java5 for us is pretty low, right now.
>>
>> Dropping support for Java5 would cause issues with SOME people, especially
>> those trying to use CXF in some of the older App servers. Also, to be
>> honest, the new JAX-WS and JAXB 2.2 stuff in CXF works a TON better with Java5
>> than with Java6 due to the endorsed crap. Dropping support for Java5 would
>> mean much of the JAXWS 2.2/JAXB 2.2 would not be tested on a day to day basis
>> as that stuff is currently only tested when run on Java5. Thus, there is a
>> big cost of dropping it just from a testing and support standpoint. Getting
>> that stuff to run on Java6 properly would likely require a lot more
>> configuration in the poms, updates to our plugins, likely updates to some of
>> the Maven plugins, etc.... Basically, it's not easy.
>>
>> Thus, in my opinon, I don't think *right now* is the right time to drop
>> support for Java 5. Maybe for 2.5, but likely not for 2.4. That said, I
>> could potentially be convinced either way. :-)
>>
>> --
>> Daniel Kulp
>> dkulp@apache.org
>> http://dankulp.com/blog
>> Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: When do we drop Java 5 support?
Posted by Fred Dushin <fr...@dushin.net>.
Speaking from the field, you do not want to drop 1.5. There are organization out there that are not moving to 1.6 (or are moving very slowly) out of fear of Oracle's collecting royalties under the 1.6 redistribution terms.
CXF is meant to be an embedded library. If you drop support for 1.5, you will find users who will not upgrade. At a minimum, CXF should support 1.5 on one of its branches.
Not everyone out there has the luxury of being on the bleeding edge.
-Fred
On Feb 22, 2011, at 11:17 AM, Daniel Kulp wrote:
> On Tuesday 22 February 2011 3:45:44 AM Christian Schneider wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> now that camel dropped Java 5 I am asking myself when will we also drop
>> support for Java 5 in CXF? As CXF 2.4.0 allows some bigger changes than
>> a minor version we could do that in my opinion.
>
> Well, I guess the question is: what is the cost of supporting Java 5 compared
> to the cost of dropping it? For Camel, the cost was pretty high as they had
> some dependencies for various components that required Java6. Thus, you
> really couldn't do complete Camel builds with Java5 anyway.
>
> CXF is a bit different. RIGHT NOW, we don't have anything anyplace that
> requires Java 6. In generaly, the only "cost" we have is the occasional
> @Override annotation that Eclipse likes to stick on everything causing a
> Jenkins build break and some slight additional complexity in the poms. Thus,
> the cost of supporting Java5 for us is pretty low, right now.
>
> Dropping support for Java5 would cause issues with SOME people, especially
> those trying to use CXF in some of the older App servers. Also, to be
> honest, the new JAX-WS and JAXB 2.2 stuff in CXF works a TON better with Java5
> than with Java6 due to the endorsed crap. Dropping support for Java5 would
> mean much of the JAXWS 2.2/JAXB 2.2 would not be tested on a day to day basis
> as that stuff is currently only tested when run on Java5. Thus, there is a
> big cost of dropping it just from a testing and support standpoint. Getting
> that stuff to run on Java6 properly would likely require a lot more
> configuration in the poms, updates to our plugins, likely updates to some of
> the Maven plugins, etc.... Basically, it's not easy.
>
> Thus, in my opinon, I don't think *right now* is the right time to drop
> support for Java 5. Maybe for 2.5, but likely not for 2.4. That said, I
> could potentially be convinced either way. :-)
>
> --
> Daniel Kulp
> dkulp@apache.org
> http://dankulp.com/blog
> Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: When do we drop Java 5 support?
Posted by Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>.
On Tuesday 22 February 2011 3:45:44 AM Christian Schneider wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> now that camel dropped Java 5 I am asking myself when will we also drop
> support for Java 5 in CXF? As CXF 2.4.0 allows some bigger changes than
> a minor version we could do that in my opinion.
Well, I guess the question is: what is the cost of supporting Java 5 compared
to the cost of dropping it? For Camel, the cost was pretty high as they had
some dependencies for various components that required Java6. Thus, you
really couldn't do complete Camel builds with Java5 anyway.
CXF is a bit different. RIGHT NOW, we don't have anything anyplace that
requires Java 6. In generaly, the only "cost" we have is the occasional
@Override annotation that Eclipse likes to stick on everything causing a
Jenkins build break and some slight additional complexity in the poms. Thus,
the cost of supporting Java5 for us is pretty low, right now.
Dropping support for Java5 would cause issues with SOME people, especially
those trying to use CXF in some of the older App servers. Also, to be
honest, the new JAX-WS and JAXB 2.2 stuff in CXF works a TON better with Java5
than with Java6 due to the endorsed crap. Dropping support for Java5 would
mean much of the JAXWS 2.2/JAXB 2.2 would not be tested on a day to day basis
as that stuff is currently only tested when run on Java5. Thus, there is a
big cost of dropping it just from a testing and support standpoint. Getting
that stuff to run on Java6 properly would likely require a lot more
configuration in the poms, updates to our plugins, likely updates to some of
the Maven plugins, etc.... Basically, it's not easy.
Thus, in my opinon, I don't think *right now* is the right time to drop
support for Java 5. Maybe for 2.5, but likely not for 2.4. That said, I
could potentially be convinced either way. :-)
--
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org
http://dankulp.com/blog
Talend - http://www.talend.com
Re: When do we drop Java 5 support?
Posted by robert <ro...@gliesian.com>.
Just FYI...
Java SE 5.0 went EOL October 2009:
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html.
Extended Oracle business support for Java SE 5.0 ends May 2014. Though
premier supports ends May 2011, which is coming right up.
Considering Java SE 7, I personally feel that Camel did the right
thing.
-- Robert
On Tue, 22 Feb 2011 09:55:56 -0600, Craig Tataryn <cr...@tataryn.net>
wrote:
> I'm *soo* glad I'm out of WAS 6.1 land now, this statement would have
> sent me running for the hills. :)
>
> Craig.
>
> On 2011-02-22, at 2:45 AM, Christian Schneider wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> now that camel dropped Java 5 I am asking myself when will we also drop support for Java 5 in CXF? As CXF 2.4.0 allows some bigger changes than a minor version we could do that in my opinion.
>>
>> Christian
>>
>> --
>> ----
>> http://www.liquid-reality.de
>>
Re: When do we drop Java 5 support?
Posted by Craig Tataryn <cr...@tataryn.net>.
I'm *soo* glad I'm out of WAS 6.1 land now, this statement would have sent me running for the hills. :)
Craig.
On 2011-02-22, at 2:45 AM, Christian Schneider wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> now that camel dropped Java 5 I am asking myself when will we also drop support for Java 5 in CXF? As CXF 2.4.0 allows some bigger changes than a minor version we could do that in my opinion.
>
> Christian
>
> --
> ----
> http://www.liquid-reality.de
>
Re: When do we drop Java 5 support?
Posted by Glen Mazza <gm...@talend.com>.
Probably nice to drop Java 5 with CXF 2.4.0, especially if there's any
architectural cobwebs in CXF necessitated by supporting it; apparently
though ActiveMQ still supports Java 5
(http://activemq.apache.org/getting-started.html#GettingStarted-PreInstallationRequirements).
Glen
On 2/22/2011 3:45 AM, Christian Schneider wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> now that camel dropped Java 5 I am asking myself when will we also drop
> support for Java 5 in CXF? As CXF 2.4.0 allows some bigger changes than
> a minor version we could do that in my opinion.
>
> Christian
>