[12] RFR: JDK-8209966: Update minimum boot JDK to 11

[Tom Schindl]

Hi,

As a general rule I'm fine with that but as outlined in another reply we
should only break building with older JDKs in case it really adds value.

So I think we should official define the JDK N-1 and JDK N but don't pro
actively break JDK N-2, ... if there's no real value.

Tom

On 24.09.18 16:40, Kevin Rushforth wrote:
> 
>> In general, I think developers updating from JavaFX 11-12-13 are also
>> capable of updating the JDK from 11-12-13, so I prefer the coupling
>>
>> 1. Allow building JavaFX N with either JDK N-1 or JDK N.
>>
> 
> This is also my preference.
> 
> -- Kevin
> 
> 
> On 9/24/2018 12:12 AM, Johan Vos wrote:
>>
>>
>>     > And it's only going to get worse as time goes on. Would it not be
>>     > possible to support up until the last JDK LTS(Starting at 11)
>>     release
>>     > for building JavaFX? I feel like maybe that would be more
>>     reasonable.
>>
>>     This is a good question, and maybe in the future we might not be so
>>     quick to do this...or maybe we will.  We should discuss this
>>     before we
>>     get to this point for JavaFX 13, a little less than six months
>>     from now.
>>     The choices for the model are:
>>
>>     1. Allow building JavaFX N with either JDK N-1 or JDK N.
>>     2. Allow building JavaFX N with the most recent LTS or later.
>>
>>     Choice #1 will allow JavaFX to better keep pace with JDK features
>>     (API
>>     or language features). Choice #2 will allow JavaFX to build and
>>     run with
>>     the most current, stable JDK LTS at the cost of not being able to use
>>     newer JDK features.
>>
>>
>> One of the reasons Java is moving to a fast release cadence is because
>> today, this is required to stay relevant in a fast-changing landscape.
>> I think we need to do the same with JavaFX. We should be able to
>> leverage the latest and greatest advances in the JDK, since this will
>> allow JavaFX to move fast as well, which is required to stay relevant.
>>
>> If you want to run on the latest stable JDK LTS, the logical
>> consequence seems to me you use the latest stable JavaFX LTS. There is
>> LTS support available for both Java and JavaFX 11 and they are pretty
>> well aligned.
>>
>> Having said that, there is no point in moving forward just for the fun
>> of it. We also have to distinguish between changes in the VM or in the
>> core Java API's.
>> My opinion is that if a new feature is added to JDK N, we can really
>> take advantage of it in JavaFX (N+1).
>> In some cases, there won't be new features relevant to OpenJFX. But
>> even then, I don't think we can't change our rules on a per-release
>> case (e.g. JavaFX 14 works with Java 13 and Java 14, and even Java 12;
>> but JavaFX 15 works with Java 14 and Java 15 and not with Java 13).
>>
>> In general, I think developers updating from JavaFX 11-12-13 are also
>> capable of updating the JDK from 11-12-13, so I prefer the coupling
>>
>> 1. Allow building JavaFX N with either JDK N-1 or JDK N.
>>
>> - Johan
>>
>>
>>
> 

-- 
Tom Schindl, CTO
BestSolution.at EDV Systemhaus GmbH
Eduard-Bodem-Gasse 5-7. A-6020 Innsbruck
Reg. Nr. FN 222302s am Firmenbuchgericht Innsbruck