Grails 2.0 JDK Compatibility

[Jeff Brown-4]

As we are closing in on finalizing Grails 2.0 (this release is going to be Awesome indeed) we are at a point where we need to make a decision about JDK compatibility.  The short of it is that we may require JDK 1.6 at development time and still support 1.5 at deployment time.  Supporting JDK 1.5 at development time is going to bring with it some potentially significant complexity and maintenance issues.  With Grails 2 being a major release we may consider avoiding that complexity and requiring JDK 1.6 at development time.  While developing with 1.6, application developers would have the option to express that they want their target.level and source.level to be 1.5.

We are looking for feedback on this.  When you consider the timeline that may apply to your adopting Grails 2, would requiring JDK 1.6 in your development environment be a significant problem?

This is the sort of question that often only triggers a response from folks who think they may have a problem.  Those who are fine with it may be less inclined to respond.  The more feedback we get, the better information we will have to work with.

Thanks for your time.



Jeff

--
Jeff Brown
[hidden email]
SpringSource - A Division Of VMware
http://www.springsource.com/

Autism Strikes 1 in 166
Find The Cause ~ Find The Cure
http://www.autismspeaks.org/


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email

On 26/09/2011, at 8:07 PM, Jeff Brown wrote:

> As we are closing in on finalizing Grails 2.0 (this release is going to be Awesome indeed) we are at a point where we need to make a decision about JDK compatibility.  The short of it is that we may require JDK 1.6 at development time and still support 1.5 at deployment time.  Supporting JDK 1.5 at development time is going to bring with it some potentially significant complexity and maintenance issues.  With Grails 2 being a major release we may consider avoiding that complexity and requiring JDK 1.6 at development time.  While developing with 1.6, application developers would have the option to express that they want their target.level and source.level to be 1.5.
>
> We are looking for feedback on this.  When you consider the timeline that may apply to your adopting Grails 2, would requiring JDK 1.6 in your development environment be a significant problem?
>
> This is the sort of question that often only triggers a response from folks who think they may have a problem.  Those who are fine with it may be less inclined to respond.  The more feedback we get, the better information we will have to work with.
>
> Thanks for your time.

If my target deployment platform is Java 1.5, am I going to be able to run my test suite with Java 1.5?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email

[Ian Roberts]

On 26/09/2011 20:07, Jeff Brown wrote:

> As we are closing in on finalizing Grails 2.0 (this release is going
> to be Awesome indeed) we are at a point where we need to make a
> decision about JDK compatibility.  The short of it is that we may
> require JDK 1.6 at development time and still support 1.5 at
> deployment time.  Supporting JDK 1.5 at development time is going to
> bring with it some potentially significant complexity and maintenance
> issues.  With Grails 2 being a major release we may consider avoiding
> that complexity and requiring JDK 1.6 at development time.  While
> developing with 1.6, application developers would have the option to
> express that they want their target.level and source.level to be
> 1.5.

If you want to be sure your application will deploy to Java 1.5 then you
*must* build and test it on Java 1.5.  Setting the source and target
compatibility levels to 1.5 will generate bytecode that can be
understood by a 1.5 VM, but it can't catch the cases where you've
accidentally called APIs that only exist in 1.6.  Which APIs these are
is not always obvious - some quite innocuous-looking methods like
String.isEmpty or the two-argument constructor of IOException are new in
1.6 - and you really need to build against a 1.5 class library to make
sure you catch them.

Ian

--
Ian Roberts               | Department of Computer Science
[hidden email]  | University of Sheffield, UK

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email

[Jeff Brown-3]

On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Ian Roberts <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Setting the source and target
> compatibility levels to 1.5 will generate bytecode that can be
> understood by a 1.5 VM, but it can't catch the cases where you've
> accidentally called APIs that only exist in 1.6.  Which APIs these are
> is not always obvious - some quite innocuous-looking methods like
> String.isEmpty or the two-argument constructor of IOException are new in
> 1.6 - and you really need to build against a 1.5 class library to make
> sure you catch them.
>

That is correct.  You would be left with the same kinds of issues you
would have compiling any Java application with 1.6 and setting the
source/target level to 1.5.



jb

--
Jeff Brown
SpringSource
http://www.springsource.com/

Autism Strikes 1 in 166
Find The Cause ~ Find The Cure
http://www.autismspeaks.org/

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email

[Bill Stephens]

My team's software product just made the move to Java 6 with our last release.  We require it for development and deployment. At some point you have to make these decisions to reduce complexity.

Bill S.

On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 3:34 PM, Jeff Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Ian Roberts <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Setting the source and target
> compatibility levels to 1.5 will generate bytecode that can be
> understood by a 1.5 VM, but it can't catch the cases where you've
> accidentally called APIs that only exist in 1.6.  Which APIs these are
> is not always obvious - some quite innocuous-looking methods like
> String.isEmpty or the two-argument constructor of IOException are new in
> 1.6 - and you really need to build against a 1.5 class library to make
> sure you catch them.
>

That is correct.  You would be left with the same kinds of issues you
would have compiling any Java application with 1.6 and setting the
source/target level to 1.5.



jb

--
Jeff Brown
SpringSource

http://www.springsource.com/

Autism Strikes 1 in 166
Find The Cause ~ Find The Cure
http://www.autismspeaks.org/

---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

   http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email

[Dean Del Ponte-2]

+1 on your proposed solution.  

On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 2:58 PM, Bill Stephens <[hidden email]> wrote:

My team's software product just made the move to Java 6 with our last release.  We require it for development and deployment. At some point you have to make these decisions to reduce complexity.

Bill S.

On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 3:34 PM, Jeff Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:

On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 2:25 PM, Ian Roberts <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Setting the source and target
> compatibility levels to 1.5 will generate bytecode that can be
> understood by a 1.5 VM, but it can't catch the cases where you've
> accidentally called APIs that only exist in 1.6.  Which APIs these are
> is not always obvious - some quite innocuous-looking methods like
> String.isEmpty or the two-argument constructor of IOException are new in
> 1.6 - and you really need to build against a 1.5 class library to make
> sure you catch them.
>

That is correct.  You would be left with the same kinds of issues you
would have compiling any Java application with 1.6 and setting the
source/target level to 1.5.



jb

--
Jeff Brown
SpringSource

http://www.springsource.com/

Autism Strikes 1 in 166
Find The Cause ~ Find The Cure
http://www.autismspeaks.org/

---------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

   http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email

[seeker136]

+1 on your proposal

[Radim Kolar]

Requiring JDK6 is not a problem. For old JDKs there will be still old
grails available.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email

[Colin Harrington]

+1

No problem here, but I'm not usually in very restrictive environments.

What about JDK 7 support?  If it isn't stable yet, then we are limiting folks to one choice(and a bunch of update releases) for development.

The End Of Life for J2SE 5.0 was November 3rd, 2009.  I'd say do it!

Colin Harrington
[hidden email]

On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 3:06 PM, Radim Kolar <[hidden email]> wrote:

Requiring JDK6 is not a problem. For old JDKs there will be still old grails available.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

  http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email

[Stefan Armbruster]

+1 for JDK 1.6


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email

[Marcin Gryszko]

+1 for JDK 1.6. In our current environment it's no big deal, since JBoss 4.2 has a version that runs on the top of Java 1.6

On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 10:24 PM, Stefan Armbruster <[hidden email]> wrote:

+1 for JDK 1.6

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

   http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email

[Göran Ehrsson]

+1 for JDK 1.6.

All my customers are on 1.6 and has been for a long time.

/Göran


Jeff Brown wrote 2011-09-26 21:07:

> As we are closing in on finalizing Grails 2.0 (this release is going to be Awesome indeed) we are at a point where we need to make a decision about JDK compatibility.  The short of it is that we may require JDK 1.6 at development time and still support 1.5 at deployment time.  Supporting JDK 1.5 at development time is going to bring with it some potentially significant complexity and maintenance issues.  With Grails 2 being a major release we may consider avoiding that complexity and requiring JDK 1.6 at development time.  While developing with 1.6, application developers would have the option to express that they want their target.level and source.level to be 1.5.
>
> We are looking for feedback on this.  When you consider the timeline that may apply to your adopting Grails 2, would requiring JDK 1.6 in your development environment be a significant problem?
>
> This is the sort of question that often only triggers a response from folks who think they may have a problem.  Those who are fine with it may be less inclined to respond.  The more feedback we get, the better information we will have to work with.
>
> Thanks for your time.
>
>
>
> Jeff

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email

[LE]

I don't think doing upgrades are high on the priority list for people on JDK 1.5.  

Like other's have said, Grails 1.3.7 is still a great release for them to continue using.

[Joseph Nusairat]

i will say the 1.6 will be an issue for some of the larger clients i am at.

One in particular ... a very large client still uses 1.5 for deployment (websphere) and even their winXP dev boxes are still in 1.5

[asafdav2]

+1 for JDK 1.6

[Martin Saucier-2]

+1 JDK 1.6 !

Martin Saucier
Solutions Architect | VINVOX
t 506.874.8906
[hidden email]
www.vinvox.com

Sent from my iPhone

On 2011-09-26, at 6:46 PM, asafdav2 <[hidden email]> wrote:

> +1 for JDK 1.6
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://grails.1312388.n4.nabble.com/Grails-2-0-JDK-Compatibility-tp3844977p3845516.html
> Sent from the Grails - user mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:
>
>    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

    http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email

[rrullo]

+1 on approach.  No issues with proposal.

Looking forward to the release!

On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Jeff Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:

As we are closing in on finalizing Grails 2.0 (this release is going to be Awesome indeed) we are at a point where we need to make a decision about JDK compatibility.  The short of it is that we may require JDK 1.6 at development time and still support 1.5 at deployment time.  Supporting JDK 1.5 at development time is going to bring with it some potentially significant complexity and maintenance issues.  With Grails 2 being a major release we may consider avoiding that complexity and requiring JDK 1.6 at development time.  While developing with 1.6, application developers would have the option to express that they want their target.level and source.level to be 1.5.

We are looking for feedback on this.  When you consider the timeline that may apply to your adopting Grails 2, would requiring JDK 1.6 in your development environment be a significant problem?

This is the sort of question that often only triggers a response from folks who think they may have a problem.  Those who are fine with it may be less inclined to respond.  The more feedback we get, the better information we will have to work with.

Thanks for your time.



Jeff

--
Jeff Brown
[hidden email]
SpringSource - A Division Of VMware
http://www.springsource.com/

Autism Strikes 1 in 166
Find The Cause ~ Find The Cure
http://www.autismspeaks.org/


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

   http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email

[wstidolph]

+1 for JDK 1.6 at dev time; no preference as to JDK 1.5 deployability (not an issue for me)

[Maplye]

+1 for JDK 1.6

2011/9/27 Bob Rullo <[hidden email]>

+1 on approach.  No issues with proposal.

Looking forward to the release!

On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Jeff Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:

As we are closing in on finalizing Grails 2.0 (this release is going to be Awesome indeed) we are at a point where we need to make a decision about JDK compatibility.  The short of it is that we may require JDK 1.6 at development time and still support 1.5 at deployment time.  Supporting JDK 1.5 at development time is going to bring with it some potentially significant complexity and maintenance issues.  With Grails 2 being a major release we may consider avoiding that complexity and requiring JDK 1.6 at development time.  While developing with 1.6, application developers would have the option to express that they want their target.level and source.level to be 1.5.

We are looking for feedback on this.  When you consider the timeline that may apply to your adopting Grails 2, would requiring JDK 1.6 in your development environment be a significant problem?

This is the sort of question that often only triggers a response from folks who think they may have a problem.  Those who are fine with it may be less inclined to respond.  The more feedback we get, the better information we will have to work with.

Thanks for your time.



Jeff

--
Jeff Brown
[hidden email]
SpringSource - A Division Of VMware
http://www.springsource.com/

Autism Strikes 1 in 166
Find The Cause ~ Find The Cure
http://www.autismspeaks.org/


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

   http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email

[gauravchauhan]

+1 for JDK 1.6

Looking forward to Grails 2.0

Regards
Gaurav Chauhan

On Tue, Sep 27, 2011 at 7:17 AM, maplye <[hidden email]> wrote:

+1 for JDK 1.6

2011/9/27 Bob Rullo <[hidden email]>

+1 on approach.  No issues with proposal.

Looking forward to the release!

On Mon, Sep 26, 2011 at 3:07 PM, Jeff Brown <[hidden email]> wrote:

As we are closing in on finalizing Grails 2.0 (this release is going to be Awesome indeed) we are at a point where we need to make a decision about JDK compatibility.  The short of it is that we may require JDK 1.6 at development time and still support 1.5 at deployment time.  Supporting JDK 1.5 at development time is going to bring with it some potentially significant complexity and maintenance issues.  With Grails 2 being a major release we may consider avoiding that complexity and requiring JDK 1.6 at development time.  While developing with 1.6, application developers would have the option to express that they want their target.level and source.level to be 1.5.

We are looking for feedback on this.  When you consider the timeline that may apply to your adopting Grails 2, would requiring JDK 1.6 in your development environment be a significant problem?

This is the sort of question that often only triggers a response from folks who think they may have a problem.  Those who are fine with it may be less inclined to respond.  The more feedback we get, the better information we will have to work with.

Thanks for your time.



Jeff

--
Jeff Brown
[hidden email]
SpringSource - A Division Of VMware
http://www.springsource.com/

Autism Strikes 1 in 166
Find The Cause ~ Find The Cure
http://www.autismspeaks.org/


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe from this list, please visit:

   http://xircles.codehaus.org/manage_email