Another thing is, Keycloak also is now JDK-8: https://github.com/keycloak/keycloak/tree/1.8.1.Final#building (current release is 1.9.1 and 2.0.0-CR1 is in the making) And one of the JDKs even called Java7 dead, sure... that's not that important. I am very supportive of this, especially our main server platforms (WildFly and EAP) are also Java8 only with the latest releases On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; wrote: -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf

On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 10:07 AM, Idel Pivnitskiy <idel.pivnitskiy(a)gmail.com for HTTP/2 and APNs, we need JDK8, I think this is the important message here :) > > Best regards, > Idel Pivnitskiy > -- > Twitter: @idelpivnitskiy <https://twitter.com/idelpivnitskiy> > GitHub: @idelpivnitskiy <https://github.com/idelpivnitskiy> > > On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 11:41 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; > >> Another thing is, Keycloak also is now JDK-8: >> https://github.com/keycloak/keycloak/tree/1.8.1.Final#building >> >> (current release is 1.9.1 and 2.0.0-CR1 is in the making) >> >> And one of the JDKs even called Java7 dead, sure... that's not that >> important. >> >> I am very supportive of this, especially our main server platforms >> (WildFly and EAP) are also Java8 only with the latest releases >> >> >> >> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 9:34 AM, Matthias Wessendorf <matzew(a)apache.org&gt; >>> >>> For our work, required for supporting APNs' HTTP/2 APIs we also need >>> JDK-8. >>> >>> I wonder if we should call the release 2.0.0, and really aim only >>> WF10/EAP7 + (Open)JDK-8 >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 18, 2016 at 9:31 AM, Lukáš Fryč <lukas(a)fryc.eu>>> >>>> Hi guys, >>>> >>>> we are working on delivering some improvements in UPS messaging >>>> subsystem in 1.2.0, >>>> >>>> and part of that is also adoption of WF10 (with ActiveMQ Artemis >>>> underneath). >>>> >>>> >>>> The problem is that WF10 is JDK8 only, so if we use it for tests, we >>>> are limiting ourselves to JDK8-only build. We could run it on WF8 with >>>> JDK7, off course. >>>> >>>> Question is, do we want to support WF8 with UPS 1.2.0+, or should we >>>> switch to WF10 only? >>>> >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> >>>> ~ Lukas >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> aerogear-dev mailing list >>>> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Matthias Wessendorf >>> >>> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >>> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >>> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Matthias Wessendorf >> >> blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ >> sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf >> twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf >> >> _______________________________________________ >> aerogear-dev mailing list >> aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org >> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev >> > > > _______________________________________________ > aerogear-dev mailing list > aerogear-dev(a)lists.jboss.org > https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/aerogear-dev > -- Matthias Wessendorf blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/ sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf twitter: http://twitter.com/mwessendorf