You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commits@directory.apache.org by co...@apache.org on 2015/01/05 16:15:56 UTC
svn commit: r1649544 - /directory/apacheds/trunk/pom.xml
Author: coheigea
Date: Mon Jan 5 15:15:55 2015
New Revision: 1649544
URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1649544
Log:
Updating some dependencies
Modified:
directory/apacheds/trunk/pom.xml
Modified: directory/apacheds/trunk/pom.xml
URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/directory/apacheds/trunk/pom.xml?rev=1649544&r1=1649543&r2=1649544&view=diff
==============================================================================
--- directory/apacheds/trunk/pom.xml (original)
+++ directory/apacheds/trunk/pom.xml Mon Jan 5 15:15:55 2015
@@ -66,20 +66,20 @@
<ehcache.version>2.8.5</ehcache.version>
<findbugs.annotations.version>1.0.0</findbugs.annotations.version>
<jetty.version>6.1.14</jetty.version>
- <junit.version>4.11</junit.version>
+ <junit.version>4.12</junit.version>
<ldapsdk.version>4.1</ldapsdk.version>
<log4j.version>1.2.17</log4j.version>
<maven.archiver.version>2.6</maven.archiver.version>
- <maven.artifact.version>3.2.3</maven.artifact.version>
- <maven.plugin.api.version>3.2.3</maven.plugin.api.version>
+ <maven.artifact.version>3.2.5</maven.artifact.version>
+ <maven.plugin.api.version>3.2.5</maven.plugin.api.version>
<maven.project.version>3.0-alpha-2</maven.project.version>
<mina.core.version>2.0.9</mina.core.version>
- <plexus.utils.version>3.0.20</plexus.utils.version>
- <slf4j.api.version>1.7.7</slf4j.api.version>
- <slf4j.log4j12.version>1.7.7</slf4j.log4j12.version>
+ <plexus.utils.version>3.0.21</plexus.utils.version>
+ <slf4j.api.version>1.7.9</slf4j.api.version>
+ <slf4j.log4j12.version>1.7.9</slf4j.log4j12.version>
<wrapper.version>3.2.3</wrapper.version>
- <pax-exam.version>3.5.0</pax-exam.version>
- <pax-url.version>2.2.0</pax-url.version>
+ <pax-exam.version>4.4.0</pax-exam.version>
+ <pax-url.version>2.3.0</pax-url.version>
<org.apache.felix.version>4.4.1</org.apache.felix.version>
<logback.version>1.1.2</logback.version>
</properties>
Re: svn commit: r1649544 - /directory/apacheds/trunk/pom.xml
Posted by Emmanuel Lécharny <el...@gmail.com>.
Le 05/01/15 18:48, Stefan Seelmann a écrit :
> On 01/05/2015 04:15 PM, coheigea@apache.org wrote:
>> - <pax-exam.version>3.5.0</pax-exam.version>
>> - <pax-url.version>2.2.0</pax-url.version>
>> + <pax-exam.version>4.4.0</pax-exam.version>
>> + <pax-url.version>2.3.0</pax-url.version>
> When using pax-exam 4.4.0 we need to set compiler level of our projects
> to Java 1.7 otherwise the OSGi tests will fail. I'm ok with increasing
> the compiler level, but maybe some users still stick to 1.6?
The Java EOL has considerably shorten lately :
Java 5 [May 2004, Oct 2009]
Java 6 [Dec 2006, Feb 2013]
Java 7 [Jul 2011, Apr 2015]
Java 8 [Mar 2014, Mar 2017]...
So basically, a Java version is maintained 3 years, more or less.
Does it make any sense to keep going with a version which is not
maintained for around 2 years now?
I'm not sure...
IMHO, we should keep the trunk working with the two Java versions which
are active at the moment we cut a release : here, Java 7 and Java 8.
For those who want to get a code working with older revision, I wouls
suggest they contact companies supporting ApacheDS...
PS : there is one major reason I don't want to take care of older
revisions and not maintained: it already takes a hell lot of time to fix
bugs related to JVM upgrades (I had to fix many of such issues when we
tested the server with Java 8, and it's likely to happen again), and I
think once it's done, there is little value in backporting the fixes.
Also consider that Java 8 is faster than Java 7, and than Java 6, so why
would we support older JVM ? I know that some users will say that "we
have this version of Java installed on our server, and we don't want to
change that". Docker, Docker, Docker...
Re: svn commit: r1649544 - /directory/apacheds/trunk/pom.xml
Posted by Stefan Seelmann <ma...@stefan-seelmann.de>.
Seems I didn't remember correctly:
When using pax-exam 4.4.0 it is not possible to build using JDK 6.
However it is posssible to build using JDK 7 *and* to create Java6
compliant class files (what we do with maven-compiler-plugin setting).
And I think each developer uses at least JDK 7 anyway, right? The only
risk is that we use some class/method not available in Java6, but that
is independent from pax-exam version.
So I think we can keep pax-exam 4.4.0.
Sorry for the confusion.
Kind Regards,
Stefan
On 01/06/2015 11:04 AM, Colm O hEigeartaigh wrote:
> I guess it's not such a good idea to impose a minimum JDK version on a
> minor release. I will revert the pax exam change unless someone thinks it
> should stay?
>
> Colm.
>
> On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 5:48 PM, Stefan Seelmann <ma...@stefan-seelmann.de>
> wrote:
>
>> On 01/05/2015 04:15 PM, coheigea@apache.org wrote:
>>> - <pax-exam.version>3.5.0</pax-exam.version>
>>> - <pax-url.version>2.2.0</pax-url.version>
>>> + <pax-exam.version>4.4.0</pax-exam.version>
>>> + <pax-url.version>2.3.0</pax-url.version>
>>
>> When using pax-exam 4.4.0 we need to set compiler level of our projects
>> to Java 1.7 otherwise the OSGi tests will fail. I'm ok with increasing
>> the compiler level, but maybe some users still stick to 1.6?
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>> Stefan
>>
>>
>
>
Re: svn commit: r1649544 - /directory/apacheds/trunk/pom.xml
Posted by Colm O hEigeartaigh <co...@apache.org>.
I guess it's not such a good idea to impose a minimum JDK version on a
minor release. I will revert the pax exam change unless someone thinks it
should stay?
Colm.
On Mon, Jan 5, 2015 at 5:48 PM, Stefan Seelmann <ma...@stefan-seelmann.de>
wrote:
> On 01/05/2015 04:15 PM, coheigea@apache.org wrote:
> > - <pax-exam.version>3.5.0</pax-exam.version>
> > - <pax-url.version>2.2.0</pax-url.version>
> > + <pax-exam.version>4.4.0</pax-exam.version>
> > + <pax-url.version>2.3.0</pax-url.version>
>
> When using pax-exam 4.4.0 we need to set compiler level of our projects
> to Java 1.7 otherwise the OSGi tests will fail. I'm ok with increasing
> the compiler level, but maybe some users still stick to 1.6?
>
> Kind Regards,
> Stefan
>
>
--
Colm O hEigeartaigh
Talend Community Coder
http://coders.talend.com
Re: svn commit: r1649544 - /directory/apacheds/trunk/pom.xml
Posted by Stefan Seelmann <ma...@stefan-seelmann.de>.
On 01/05/2015 04:15 PM, coheigea@apache.org wrote:
> - <pax-exam.version>3.5.0</pax-exam.version>
> - <pax-url.version>2.2.0</pax-url.version>
> + <pax-exam.version>4.4.0</pax-exam.version>
> + <pax-url.version>2.3.0</pax-url.version>
When using pax-exam 4.4.0 we need to set compiler level of our projects
to Java 1.7 otherwise the OSGi tests will fail. I'm ok with increasing
the compiler level, but maybe some users still stick to 1.6?
Kind Regards,
Stefan
Re: svn commit: r1649544 - /directory/apacheds/trunk/pom.xml
Posted by Emmanuel Lécharny <el...@gmail.com>.
Le 05/01/15 16:15, coheigea@apache.org a écrit :
> Author: coheigea
> Date: Mon Jan 5 15:15:55 2015
> New Revision: 1649544
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/r1649544
> Log:
> Updating some dependencies
Thanks for that, Colm.
I'm extending those changes to the other projects.
One more thing I'm currently doing is to update the 'project' project,
which contains the version of all the shared plugins. Currently, we are
depending on version 33, I'll make the projects depends on 34-SNAPSHOT.
This will impact :
- ldap api
- apacheds
- jdbm
- mavibot
- fortress
- escimo
- studio.