<div dir="ltr"><div><div>Good information, Jose. If Ubuntu is switching to Java 8 in April then I think that seals the deal for using 8 for all development after the February release.<br><br></div>I still don't see the point of dictating Java 7 for the 4.2 release, but it does sound like it will impact relatively few users.<br><br></div><div>Cheers,<br></div>-Spencer<br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 11:17 PM, Jose Duarte <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jose.duarte@rcsb.org" target="_blank">jose.duarte@rcsb.org</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">The lack of a Java 8 package in the standard repositories for Ubuntu 14.04LTS is definitely a big argument against 1.8. Andreas plan of doing 1.7 for next release and 1.8 for the one after sounds like a great compromise. The next Ubuntu LTS will come in April with Java 8 packages, so that will be a good timing for our move to 1.8 in the over-next release.<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888"><div><br></div><div>Jose</div></font></span></div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 13, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Jan Stourac <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:xstourac@gmail.com" target="_blank">xstourac@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
We are using Java 8 (because it is requirement of one library) in
almost all our projects, so I am fine with both 7 and 8.<br>
<br>
But even though I agree with the plan of upgrading, I would like
also to note the importance of checking java/openjdk packages
available in the repositories of popular distros... For example
Debian 8 (current stable) or Ubuntu 14.04 LTS still do not have Java
8 in standard repositories and it's a hard question what is better
version to force - Java 7 with no updates from Oracle (but I think
that RedHat still take care of OpenJDK 7) or Java 8 with lack of
support from some disto maintainers?<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Jan.<div><div><br>
<br>
<div>On 01/12/2016 01:16 PM, Spencer Bliven
wrote:<br>
</div>
</div></div><blockquote type="cite"><div><div>
<div dir="ltr">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>There has been some informal discussion of
increasing the Java version requirement for
BioJava from the current Java 6 to either 7 or
8. It would be great to hear from the larger
BioJava community about whether this would be a
welcome change or not.<br>
<br>
</div>
I will start the discussion by listing what I see
as the pros and cons of setting each version as
the minimum requirement for BioJava.<br>
<br>
</div>
Java 6:<br>
---------<br>
</div>
+ Greatest backwards compatibility<br>
</div>
- No updates since <a href="http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html" target="_blank">Feb
2013</a>*<br>
</div>
<div>- Some dependencies are not compatible, requiring the
use of older versions (currently only log4j, but could
be others in the future)<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Java 7:<br>
---------<br>
</div>
<div>+ <a href="https://plumbr.eu/blog/java/java-version-statistics-2015-edition" target="_blank">Most
popular</a> version currently<br>
</div>
<div>+ Some minor language features added<br>
</div>
<div>- No updates since <a href="http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html" target="_blank">Apr
2015</a>*<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Java 8:<br>
</div>
<div>---------<br>
</div>
<div>+ Tons of awesome new programming features, e.g.
lambda functions<br>
</div>
<div>+ Only version supported by Oracle<br>
</div>
<div>- Not available for many systems<br>
<br>
</div>
* Note that all versions are backwards compatible, so you
can always use a more up-to-date JDK for downstream
projects. Running outdated software is generally a bad
idea, so users are encouraged to use the Java 8 JRE,
regardless of the minimum BioJava requirement.<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
One thing I would like to get a sense of is how many BioJava
users are still using 6 and 7. @<strong>emckee2006</strong>
mentioned on <a href="https://github.com/biojava/biojava/issues/364#issuecomment-170710242" target="_blank">github</a>
that they still have some servers on 6. I know that getting
Java 8 installed on CentOS is rather painful, so probably
some users haven't yet updated to 8.<br>
<br>
</div>
<div>Let me know if I missed anything!<br>
<br>
<br>
</div>
Cheers,<br>
<br>
</div>
Spencer<br>
<div>
<div>
<div><br>
<br>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset></fieldset>
<br>
</div></div><span><pre>_______________________________________________
Biojava-l mailing list - <a href="mailto:Biojava-l@mailman.open-bio.org" target="_blank">Biojava-l@mailman.open-bio.org</a>
<a href="http://mailman.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biojava-l" target="_blank">http://mailman.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biojava-l</a></pre>
</span></blockquote>
<br>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Biojava-l mailing list - <a href="mailto:Biojava-l@mailman.open-bio.org" target="_blank">Biojava-l@mailman.open-bio.org</a><br>
<a href="http://mailman.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biojava-l" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://mailman.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biojava-l</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
biojava-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:biojava-dev@mailman.open-bio.org">biojava-dev@mailman.open-bio.org</a><br>
<a href="http://mailman.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biojava-dev" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://mailman.open-bio.org/mailman/listinfo/biojava-dev</a><br></blockquote></div><br></div>