* Christopher <ctubbsii-fedora@xxxxxxxxxx> [2014-10-31 14:55]: > On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Deepak Bhole <dbhole@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > * Christopher <ctubbsii-fedora@xxxxxxxxxx> [2014-10-31 14:02]: > > [snip] > > > There is no issue with -target 1.6; the issue was with strict source > > compatibility with 1.6. I can't recall the specifics (it had something to > do > > with generic type checking, because 1.7's javac can make better > inferences), > > but that's outside the scope of this issue. The main point, as it relates > here, > > is that there may not be strict compatibility between javac provided by > > different JDKs, even if javac makes a best effort attempt to parse older > > source. A more obvious problem is the lack of bootstrap classpaths for > older > > -source/-target, which is known to be likely to create compiled code that > is > > not capable of running in an older JVM (this doesn't matter if you're > > developing for the latest Fedora, but it matters if you're using the > latest > > Fedora to develop for other platforms, like RHEL or Android). > > > > Ah, yeah not much we can do (with current setup) where the older rt.jar > is needed on bootstrap path :/ > > > [snip] > > Well, what we could do is rethink the policy about not packaging currently > supported JDKs, just because they are expected to not have further updates at > some future time. That policy's going to bite us anyway, if the pace of Java > ever reaches a point where a version of Java is released *and* EOL'd during the > same window (hypothetically, Java 8 is expected to EOL during F22, and Java 9 > is expected to be released and EOL'd during F22; would that mean F22 cannot > include any Java version?). > Java 8 EOL is tentatively slated for March 2017, which is well after F22 EOL (assuming F22 is released in mid-2015). Furthermore, that is a tentative date and is contingent on Java 9 being out in early 2016. In general, Java N will be supported for upto a year after N+1 is out. > Personally, I like the idea of shipping the latest as default, and the next > most recent (so long as it is currently supported) as available as an SDK/devel > package and just stop updating it when there aren't any more upstream updates > and drop it from the next release. That is what would have happened had F21 not been delayed. If Fedora sticks to a 6-month release cycle, we should be able to have one version where N is the default and N-1 is provided for legacy, followed by removal of N-1 in subsequent released. FWIW, we have had Java 8 in Fedora since March 2013 (a stable pre-release) and we are only now making it the default, almost 2 years later. Given our finite resources, I don't think we are jumping the gun here with making 8 the default. If someone in the community wants to pick up and maintain 7, they are always welcome to do so. Deepak > > -- > Christopher L Tubbs II > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii > -- java-devel mailing list java-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel
