groovy-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mario Garcia <mario.g...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on Groovy 3.0
Date Wed, 13 Jun 2018 08:08:21 GMT
I would say 3 as well

2018-06-13 10:04 GMT+02:00 Robert Oschwald <robertoschwald@gmail.com>:

> Same with me. Option 3 seems best, even when some of our projects are
> still on Grails 2.
>
>
> Am 13.06.2018 um 09:50 schrieb Søren Berg Glasius <soeren@glasius.dk>:
>
> While the project I'm on is still on JDK 7, but due to Grails 2.x I think
> that option 3 is the best way to move forward (and nudge projects on to a
> higher version of Grails as well).
>
> /Søren
>
> On Wed, 13 Jun 2018, 09.42 , <William.W.Mangum@wellsfargo.com> wrote:
>
>> I agree on option 3 (abandon 2.6 immediately).
>>
>>
>>
>> JDK 6 or 7 is not in use anywhere that I have project visibility.
>>
>>
>>
>> Full support for JKD9+ is becoming a pressing issue. Users are concerned
>> about the ability of Groovy to run on future JDK releases (including
>> GraalVM), more than legacy support.
>>
>>
>>
>> Best Regards
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Paolo Di Tommaso [mailto:paolo.ditommaso@gmail.com]
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 13, 2018 3:18 AM
>> *To:* users@groovy.apache.org
>> *Subject:* Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on
>> Groovy 3.0
>>
>>
>>
>> I agree on option 3 (abandon 2.6 immediately).
>>
>>
>>
>> Full support for JKD9+ is becoming a pressing issue. Users are concerned
>> about the ability of Groovy to run on future JDK releases (including
>> GraalVM), more than legacy support.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> p
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 9:11 AM, David Dawson <david.dawson@
>> simplicityitself.com> wrote:
>>
>> I would vote 2.
>>
>>
>>
>> Actually, i would vote 3) abandon 2.6 immediately.
>>
>>
>>
>> No projects I have any knowledge of still use jdk 7.
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* paulk@asert.com.au
>>
>> *Sent:* 13 June 2018 08:06
>>
>> *To:* users@groovy.apache.org
>>
>> *Reply to:* users@groovy.apache.org
>>
>> *Subject:* [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on Groovy
>> 3.0
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>>
>>
>> There was some discussion at gr8conf about how to speed up delivery of
>> Groovy 3.0. Some of that discussion was around the scope of what we want to
>> include and have yet to complete in 3.0 but I won't discuss that right now.
>>
>>
>>
>> One of the other discussion points was Groovy around 2.6. As many of you
>> know, we have released alpha versions of Groovy 2.6. That version is a
>> backport of most but not all of Groovy 3.0 to JDK7 including the Parrot
>> parser (though it isn't enabled by default). The purpose of this version
>> has always been to assist people/projects wanting to use the Parrot parser
>> but who might be stuck on JDK7. So in some sense it is an intermediate
>> version to assist with porting towards Groovy 3.0. While that is still a
>> noble goal in theory, in practice, many of our users are already on JDK8
>> and we have limited resources to work on many potential areas.
>>
>>
>>
>> With that in mind, we'd like to understand the preferences in our user
>> base for the following two options:
>>
>>
>>
>> Option 1: please continue releasing the best possible 2.6 even if that
>> slows down the final release of Groovy 3.0 and delays further work on
>> better support for JDK9+.
>>
>>
>>
>> Option 2: please release one more alpha of 2.6 over the next month or so
>> which will become the best version to use to assist porting for users stuck
>> on JDK7 and then focus on 3.0. The 2.6 branch will essentially be retired
>> though we will consider PRs from the community for critical fixes.
>>
>>
>>
>> Feedback welcome.
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers, Paul.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
> --
>
> Best regards / Med venlig hilsen,
>
> Søren Berg Glasius
>
> Hedevej 1, Gl. Rye, 8680 Ry, Denmark
> Mobile: +45 40 44 91 88, Skype: sbglasius
> --- Press ESC once to quit - twice to save the changes.
>
>
>

Mime
View raw message