OSDir


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [dbcp] Next


Ideally, if we can just keep various branches around in releasable states,
then we can keep old dbcp 2.x.* maintenance releases moving forward. Based
on my experiences trying to release this module before, though, I think
that process would need to be streamlined and backported.

On 17 June 2018 at 07:58, sebb <sebbaz@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> On 16 June 2018 at 22:41, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hello Mark and all,
> >
> > Thank you for the heads up on the Tomcat plans.
> >
> > Asking DBCP to stay on Java 7 for 4-5 years is insane IMO, and it
> certainly
> > is not going to attract anyone to maintain and grow this component (IMO
> > again.) If that is a set of handcuffs you want to live with, then by all
> > means ;-)
> >
> > I am sure there is nothing stopping anyone at Apache to keep patches
> coming
> > to the DBCP 2.4.x line. I plan on keeping the release train going for
> many
> > Commons component, so I am happy to release DBCP at will.
> >
> > You will notice that
> > https://commons.apache.org/proper/commons-dbcp/download_dbcp.cgi
> presents
> > no less than tree different versions of DBCP for different antique Java
> > platforms. We are just going to make that list one deeper.
>
> I think we can now drop support for JDBC 3 and JDBC 4 (Java 6)
> That leaves only JDBC 4.1 (Java 7.0) as a current release.
>
> Is that really too much to continue to support?
>
> > Again, patches are more than welcome. And do feel free to call for a RC
> or
> > RM it yourself ;-)
> >
> > Gary
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jun 16, 2018 at 2:34 PM Mark Thomas <markt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >> On 16/06/18 21:14, Matt Sicker wrote:
> >> > On 16 June 2018 at 14:11, Mark Thomas <markt@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> What is driving the desire to move to Java 8?
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> > What's driving the desire to maintain support for a seven year old
> >> release
> >> > of Java which is not supported without paying large sums of money to
> >> > Oracle?
> >>
> >> As I said, Tomcat 8 which has at least another 4 to 5 years of life in
> >> it, depends on DBCP 2 and has a specification mandated requirement to
> >> maintain compatibility with Java 7.
> >>
> >> There are ways the Tomcat community could work around this. Because Java
> >> 7 is EOL does not - on its own - strike me as a sufficiently good reason
> >> to create hassle for another ASF community.
> >>
> >> If there are new features in Java 8 we want to take advantage of or an
> >> update to the JDBC API that we want to support then fair enough. Those
> >> are good reasons but I'd like to see them explicitly articulated.
> >>
> >> Mark
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >>
> >>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
>


-- 
Matt Sicker <boards@xxxxxxxxx>