Re: RFC: Make new versions of pgjdbc Java8+

On 2017-04-03 at 12:48-05, Jorge Solórzano wrote:

> So +1 for drop support for Java 6, and -1 for drop support for Java 7.

I agree. 6 is droppable, but there are still too many users stuck with Java 7 to drop it.

    But as I said, they already have many versions to choose from.

 

On 2017-04-03 at 09:32-05, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa <aht@8kdata.com> wrote:

> However, I wonder if it would be such a big deal for people that are upgrading to

> Postgres 10 and require SCRAM not to ask them to upgrade their JVM to a non EOLed

> version.

 

If only the people who want the new functionality are required to upgrade to Java 8, then I think it is not a big deal.

If everyone who wants the latest pgjdbc patches has to upgrade to Java 8, then I think it is a big deal.

    I believe the intersection is minimal. What is the chance of users willing to upgrade to Postgres 10, needing SCRAM, running JRE6 or JRE7 and *not* wanting to upgrade their JRE? (all four conditions need to apply).

 

On 2017-04-03 at 09:32-05, Álvaro Hernández Tortosa <aht@8kdata.com> wrote:

> I think the intersection of people who go for very modern PG and non supported Java if almost 0.

The problem with using that argument as a reason to move to Java 8 is that Java 6 and 7 are supported - just not for free.

 

    I stand corrected. I mean now "non supported for free" or equivalent :)


    Álvaro

-- 

Álvaro Hernández Tortosa


-----------
<8K>data