XOM API for Processing XML with Java

["Joseph B. Ottinger" <joseph AT autumncode.com>]

Okay, I can accept that.

On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 12:34 PM, Elliotte Rusty Harold <elharo AT ibiblio.org>
wrote:

> Yes, absolutely. I had someone privately ask me about Java 6 support
> in XOM this week. I expect I'm going to hear from people who are on
> earlier versions of Java than that.
>
> In my experience people vastly overestimate how fast upgrades happen
> and vastly underestimate how many developers are using really old
> versions. This is hardly unique to JDKs. I could say the same for
> Eclipse, Linux, Windows, MacOS, Android, HTML, Maven, or most other
> platforms you care to name.
>
> There are details I can't give because they involve confidential
> internal information from more than one place, but I am confident that
> Java 9 and Java 10 aren't options for most production developers at
> this point. Java 11 might be, and maybe it will be feasible to require
> it sometime in the 2020s. At this point I'm comfortable requiring Java
> 5. Java 6 is probably OK, though not helpful in itself for any reason
> I can think of right now since Java 6 didn't add much to the language.
> Beyond that I'd be leaving users behind for no particular reason.
>
>
> On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 12:11 PM, Joseph B. Ottinger
> <joseph AT autumncode.com> wrote:
> > Elliote... why is 1.6 still even a real concern? Java 8's the oldest Java
> > version; after that, it's Java 10 for now. I'd think for new releases,
> > targeting Java 1.8's bytecode (and language compatibility) would be
> enough
> > - and supporting java 10 modules would be good as well. Targeting older
> > Java versions presumes maintenance on apps by a very very very very small
> > user group (those who are paying Oracle for JVM support) and while those
> > people are not value-less, I'd think for new releases targeting recent
> Java
> > versions would be preferable for all kinds of reasons.
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 12:00 PM, Elliotte Rusty Harold <
> elharo AT ibiblio.org>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Folks,
> >>
> >>
> >> I've quietly posted jars/zips/tars for what I think will be 1.2.11:
> >>
> >> https://www.cafeconleche.org/XOM/xom-1.2.11.jar
> >> https://www.cafeconleche.org/XOM/xom-1.2.11.zip
> >> https://www.cafeconleche.org/XOM/xom-1.2.11.tar.gz
> >>
> >> Feel free to give these a whirl. Changes are very minor aside from a
> >> single unthrown IOException I removed from Canonicalizer.
> >>
> >> This release is compiled for Java 1.6 byte code because I don't have a
> >> compiler that goes further back than that handy. However if this
> >> causes major trouble for anyone, I can try to find something that
> >> compile for older releases. Source code should be compatible as far
> >> back as Java 1.4 and probably further.
> >>
> >> If no one notices any major flaws, I'll tag the repo and update the
> >> website in a week or so.
> >>
> >> The next release will probably be tagged 1.3 and will require Java 1.5
> >> at the minimum, possibly later. It should still be fully compatible
> >> with existing code though.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Elliotte Rusty Harold
> >> elharo AT ibiblio.org
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> XOM-interest mailing list
> >> XOM-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org
> >> https://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/xom-interest
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > XOM-interest mailing list
> > XOM-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org
> > https://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/xom-interest
>
>
>
> --
> Elliotte Rusty Harold
> elharo AT ibiblio.org
> _______________________________________________
> XOM-interest mailing list
> XOM-interest AT lists.ibiblio.org
> https://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/xom-interest
>