Should we upgrade the Java default version? Attached: About the release timeline

[Georg Kallidis <ge...@cedis.fu-berlin.de>]

Hi Turbine devs,

with the release of Turbine 5.1 (and the Fulcrum components are kind of 
aligned to this) I think we should discuss further about, what we should 
set as the next main development focus points and what to set as corner 
stones,  e.g. currently we have set Java 8 as the main target version of 
our main development. 

I would suggest to upgrade to Java 11 or to Java 14 or even to Java 17 
with any upcoming releases, which might be then versioned like Core 5.2 or 
6.0.

With Java 17 we have Record types and Sealed classes and enhanced pattern 
matching in switch statements...

To make the upgrade transparent, IMO we have several options:

- before we switch (in the main/trunk branch), we might consider to 
support a Java 8 branch based on the current releases or we might even tag 
all current releases with "Java8"- ? What do you think? 
- Yet another possibility would be to create a Java 11 branch and merge 
this later or 
- support even both (or more than one development branch), but the latter 
might be not manageable (at least currently) by the Turbine community.

Currently I would suggest to create a Java11/14/17 branch and do the work 
there merging it before the next release.

With this upgrade I would expect the next release mainly a refactoring 
(Java upgrade) release and the time target about the end of the year or at 
the beginning of the next year. Fulcrum components should be aligned of 
course and the releases would follow this time line:

1. Turbine parent (include update to Apache Maven Parent POM Verison 26)
2. Fulcrum components
3. Turbine (core, archetype) 

We might do an archetype release before as this is still missing as last 
step for the current last Turbine core release..

What are your thoughts about this? 

Thanks!

Best regards, Georg

Re: Should we upgrade the Java default version? Attached: About the release timeline

[Jeffery Painter <je...@jivecast.com>]

Hi Georg,

I agree with Thomas.  I think we could move to latest and potentially 
skip the intermediate Java releases.  Work has been busy, but happy to 
contribute where ever I can.

-

Jeff


On 5/5/22 03:02, Thomas Vandahl wrote:
> Hi Georg,
>
>> Am 21.04.2022 um 10:40 schrieb Georg Kallidis <ge...@cedis.fu-berlin.de>:
>>
>> I would suggest to upgrade to Java 11 or to Java 14 or even to Java 17
>> with any upcoming releases, which might be then versioned like Core 5.2 or
>> 6.0.
>>
>> With Java 17 we have Record types and Sealed classes and enhanced pattern
>> matching in switch statements...
> +1
>
>> Currently I would suggest to create a Java11/14/17 branch and do the work
>> there merging it before the next release.
>>
> Fine. There are probably not many active Turbine users out there though, so the development could as well happen in master.
>
>> With this upgrade I would expect the next release mainly a refactoring
>> (Java upgrade) release and the time target about the end of the year or at
>> the beginning of the next year. Fulcrum components should be aligned of
>> course and the releases would follow this time line:
> On the feature side, I have been thinking about properly supporting HttpServlet.getLastModified(HttpServletRequest req) for quite a while.
> That would allow transparent caching of Turbine modules or whole pages. I just don’t know when I will get to it.
>
> Bye, Thomas
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org

Re: Should we upgrade the Java default version? Attached: About the release timeline

[Thomas Vandahl <tv...@apache.org>]

Hi Georg,

> Am 21.04.2022 um 10:40 schrieb Georg Kallidis <ge...@cedis.fu-berlin.de>:
> 
> I would suggest to upgrade to Java 11 or to Java 14 or even to Java 17 
> with any upcoming releases, which might be then versioned like Core 5.2 or 
> 6.0.
> 
> With Java 17 we have Record types and Sealed classes and enhanced pattern 
> matching in switch statements...

+1

> Currently I would suggest to create a Java11/14/17 branch and do the work 
> there merging it before the next release.
> 

Fine. There are probably not many active Turbine users out there though, so the development could as well happen in master.

> With this upgrade I would expect the next release mainly a refactoring 
> (Java upgrade) release and the time target about the end of the year or at 
> the beginning of the next year. Fulcrum components should be aligned of 
> course and the releases would follow this time line:

On the feature side, I have been thinking about properly supporting HttpServlet.getLastModified(HttpServletRequest req) for quite a while.
That would allow transparent caching of Turbine modules or whole pages. I just don’t know when I will get to it.

Bye, Thomas 
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@turbine.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@turbine.apache.org