On 03/04/17 21:47, Brad DeJong wrote:
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
