----- Original Message -----
From: "Livnat Peer" <lpeer@redhat.com> To: "Itamar Heim" <iheim@redhat.com>, "Michael Kublin" <mkublin@redhat.com> Cc: "Juan Hernandez" <jhernand@redhat.com>, engine-devel@ovirt.org Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2012 9:50:47 AM Subject: Re: [Engine-devel] java 1.6 compatibility no more?
On 21/07/12 15:15, Itamar Heim wrote:
On 07/19/2012 03:34 PM, Ayal Baron wrote:
----- Original Message -----
On Jul 19, 2012, at 14:14 , Livnat Peer wrote:
On 19/07/12 14:41, Juan Hernandez wrote:
On 07/19/2012 01:39 PM, Yair Zaslavsky wrote: > On 07/19/2012 02:31 PM, Vojtech Szocs wrote: >>> Don't we need that (the source part) to avoid Java 7 syntax >>> in >>> GWT code? >> >> That's a very good point. >> >> In general, GWT compiler supports Java 5 syntax (note that >> there >> are no language changes between Java 5 and 6). For this >> reason, >> our frontend code should be compliant with Java 5. If someone >> uses new Java 7 language features in frontend code, GWT >> compiler will throw an error and the build will fail. >> >> So the 'Java 5 only' limitation applies to frontend code and >> any >> other code (e.g. shared modules) that is directly referenced >> by >> frontend code. This shouldn't affect the backend, however. >> >> We could do something like this: >> >> - let oVirt root POM declare source and target compliance to >> Java 7 >> - let frontend modules POM >> (frontend/webadmin/modules/pom.xml) >> declare source compliance to Java 5 (or 6) >> >> (note that target compliance can be left to Java 7 since >> frontend compilation results in JavaScript code) >> >> What do you think? >> >> Vojtech > > +1 - I really like this idea!
+1 from me as well.
There are two calls to make when it comes to JDK7 (regardless of GWT - excuse me for taking this discussion some steps backwards)
1. Are we running with JRE 7? The answer is yes we agreed on that a few months ago.
2. Are we using code syntax which is incompatible with JDK6?
I think the answer to the above should be no (at least for now - maybe until the next ovirt release?). +1 exactly. Why starting with jdk6 incompatible constructs unless there is a good (or at least any) reason for them…
+1
+1 - there is merit keeping backward compatibility to allow comparing behavior while java 7 is still young.
Since no one objected, we'll go with JDK6 syntax compatibility for Now. I'm a very small fan of enforcing policy by reviewers. Not that the community reviews aren't great - but people miss things.
Here's my take on Maven's enforcer plugin to actually verify we aren't compiling with JDK 7: http://gerrit.ovirt.org/#/c/6523 comments welcome.
Kublin - can you please send a patch to remove the usage of Long.Compare in StorageDomainCommandBase
Thanks, Livnat
_______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel
_______________________________________________ Engine-devel mailing list Engine-devel@ovirt.org http://lists.ovirt.org/mailman/listinfo/engine-devel