I have some experience supporting both, so we can look at it later for sure, but IMO not a priority now

I'd say no, let's keep it 6 for now reason: only early adopters got jdk7, and there are bugs still. I have some experience supporting both, so we can look at it later for sure, but IMO not a priority now -- qmx (mobile) On 27/09/2012, at 13:21, Daniel Bevenius <daniel.bevenius(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote: > Hi All, > > I just wanted to ask if there is anything stopping us from using Java 1.7 instead of 1.6 in aerogear-controller? > > There are a few things that might be nice to use, the main one I was thinking about was using method handles instead of reflection. > > cheers, > > /Daniel > _______________________________________________ > 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

JDK 1.7 is not stable yet Daniel, just a teaser about some issues

JDK 1.7 is not stable yet Daniel, just a teaser about some issues http://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-93/product_id-1911... -- "The measure of a man is what he does with power" - Plato - @abstractj - Volenti Nihil Difficile On Thursday, September 27, 2012 at 1:21 PM, Daniel Bevenius wrote: Hi All, I just wanted to ask if there is anything stopping us from using Java 1.7 instead of 1.6 in aerogear-controller? There are a few things that might be nice to use, the main one I was thinking about was using method handles instead of reflection. cheers, /Daniel _______________________________________________ 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