On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 2:08 PM Frank Ch. Eigler <fche@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> [...] Eclipse tries to keep up to date with libraries shipped. Quite
> often the effort of moving to new versions of a library (e.g. lucene)
> requires changes in Eclipse itself
Is this level of backward non-compatibility typical in Java?
I would not say in Java overall but in certain projects - YES!
> and Fedora being ahead/behind with versions puts too much burden on
> the maintainer. This is the number two item when classified by time
> spent.
Fedora could ship some frozen/LTS versions of libraries, if these exist
and do not constitute a security problem. If that's not an option
either, to this outsider it looks like building on quicksand, paddling
as fast as possible to stay above the mud.
- FChE
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
--
Aleksandar Kurtakov
Red Hat Eclipse Team_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
