[DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on Groovy 3.0

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
34 messages Options
1234
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on Groovy 3.0

Russel Winder-3
On Wed, 2018-06-13 at 08:11 +0100, David Dawson wrote:
> I would vote 2.
>
> Actually, i would vote 3) abandon 2.6 immediately.
>

I vote for Option 3, abandon 2.6 immediately.

With so little resource, the Groovy project must focus on forward looking
work, not backward looking stuff. JDK10 is whee the current action is, and
where Groovy should be looking to be competitive.  

--
Russel.
===========================================
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk

signature.asc (849 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on Groovy 3.0

Iván López
I also vote for Option 3. I think it is better to focus on JDK 9+ than in JDK 7.

Regards, Iván.


On 13 June 2018 at 11:30, Russel Winder <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Wed, 2018-06-13 at 08:11 +0100, David Dawson wrote:
> I would vote 2.
>
> Actually, i would vote 3) abandon 2.6 immediately.
>

I vote for Option 3, abandon 2.6 immediately.

With so little resource, the Groovy project must focus on forward looking
work, not backward looking stuff. JDK10 is whee the current action is, and
where Groovy should be looking to be competitive. 

--
Russel.
===========================================
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on Groovy 3.0

Simon Sadedin
As with everyone else: option 3, or even just solving the Java9+ issue separate from 3.0 is much more important than JDK7.

Cheers,

Simon

On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 8:44 PM, Iván López <[hidden email]> wrote:
I also vote for Option 3. I think it is better to focus on JDK 9+ than in JDK 7.

Regards, Iván.


On 13 June 2018 at 11:30, Russel Winder <[hidden email]> wrote:
On Wed, 2018-06-13 at 08:11 +0100, David Dawson wrote:
> I would vote 2.
>
> Actually, i would vote 3) abandon 2.6 immediately.
>

I vote for Option 3, abandon 2.6 immediately.

With so little resource, the Groovy project must focus on forward looking
work, not backward looking stuff. JDK10 is whee the current action is, and
where Groovy should be looking to be competitive. 

--
Russel.
===========================================
Dr Russel Winder      t: +44 20 7585 2200
41 Buckmaster Road    m: +44 7770 465 077
London SW11 1EN, UK   w: www.russel.org.uk


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on Groovy 3.0

Corum, Michael
In reply to this post by paulk_asert

If 3.0 will still support JDK8, I’d vote for option 3 as well.  If 3 will require 9, then maybe option 2.

 

Michael Corum 

VP, Technical Architecture Solutions

 

RGA Reinsurance Company

16600 Swingley Ridge Road

Chesterfield, Missouri 6301701706

T 636.736.7066 

www.rgare.com

 

From: Paul King <[hidden email]>
Reply-To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>, "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Date: Wednesday, June 13, 2018 at 2:06 AM
To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Subject: [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on Groovy 3.0

 

External e-mail. Use caution! / Courriel externe. Faites attention!


 

Hi everyone,

 

There was some discussion at gr8conf about how to speed up delivery of Groovy 3.0. Some of that discussion was around the scope of what we want to include and have yet to complete in 3.0 but I won't discuss that right now.

 

One of the other discussion points was Groovy around 2.6. As many of you know, we have released alpha versions of Groovy 2.6. That version is a backport of most but not all of Groovy 3.0 to JDK7 including the Parrot parser (though it isn't enabled by default). The purpose of this version has always been to assist people/projects wanting to use the Parrot parser but who might be stuck on JDK7. So in some sense it is an intermediate version to assist with porting towards Groovy 3.0. While that is still a noble goal in theory, in practice, many of our users are already on JDK8 and we have limited resources to work on many potential areas.

 

With that in mind, we'd like to understand the preferences in our user base for the following two options:

 

Option 1: please continue releasing the best possible 2.6 even if that slows down the final release of Groovy 3.0 and delays further work on better support for JDK9+.

 

Option 2: please release one more alpha of 2.6 over the next month or so which will become the best version to use to assist porting for users stuck on JDK7 and then focus on 3.0. The 2.6 branch will essentially be retired though we will consider PRs from the community for critical fixes.

 

Feedback welcome.

 

Cheers, Paul.

 

 

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on Groovy 3.0

robert h-2
Option 3.

You can always revisit the 2.6 branch if that becomes necessary. Resources being scarce (as others have said), put them where they are needed on Groovy 3.

--
Bob

On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 8:11 AM, Corum, Michael <[hidden email]> wrote:

If 3.0 will still support JDK8, I’d vote for option 3 as well.  If 3 will require 9, then maybe option 2.

 

Michael Corum 

VP, Technical Architecture Solutions

 

RGA Reinsurance Company

16600 Swingley Ridge Road

Chesterfield, Missouri 6301701706

T 636.736.7066 

www.rgare.com

 

From: Paul King <[hidden email]>
Reply-To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>, "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Date: Wednesday, June 13, 2018 at 2:06 AM
To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Subject: [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on Groovy 3.0

 

External e-mail. Use caution! / Courriel externe. Faites attention!


 

Hi everyone,

 

There was some discussion at gr8conf about how to speed up delivery of Groovy 3.0. Some of that discussion was around the scope of what we want to include and have yet to complete in 3.0 but I won't discuss that right now.

 

One of the other discussion points was Groovy around 2.6. As many of you know, we have released alpha versions of Groovy 2.6. That version is a backport of most but not all of Groovy 3.0 to JDK7 including the Parrot parser (though it isn't enabled by default). The purpose of this version has always been to assist people/projects wanting to use the Parrot parser but who might be stuck on JDK7. So in some sense it is an intermediate version to assist with porting towards Groovy 3.0. While that is still a noble goal in theory, in practice, many of our users are already on JDK8 and we have limited resources to work on many potential areas.

 

With that in mind, we'd like to understand the preferences in our user base for the following two options:

 

Option 1: please continue releasing the best possible 2.6 even if that slows down the final release of Groovy 3.0 and delays further work on better support for JDK9+.

 

Option 2: please release one more alpha of 2.6 over the next month or so which will become the best version to use to assist porting for users stuck on JDK7 and then focus on 3.0. The 2.6 branch will essentially be retired though we will consider PRs from the community for critical fixes.

 

Feedback welcome.

 

Cheers, Paul.

 

 


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on Groovy 3.0

Eric Helgeson

Agree with option 3 as well. If you're stuck on pre jdk8 and have groovy 2.5 - that's a pretty good situation. JDK9/10/11+ compatibility is the direction the language needs to go.

On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 8:19 AM sigzero <[hidden email]> wrote:
Option 3.

You can always revisit the 2.6 branch if that becomes necessary. Resources being scarce (as others have said), put them where they are needed on Groovy 3.

--
Bob

On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 8:11 AM, Corum, Michael <[hidden email]> wrote:

If 3.0 will still support JDK8, I’d vote for option 3 as well.  If 3 will require 9, then maybe option 2.

 

Michael Corum 

VP, Technical Architecture Solutions

 

RGA Reinsurance Company

16600 Swingley Ridge Road

Chesterfield, Missouri 6301701706

T 636.736.7066 

www.rgare.com

 

From: Paul King <[hidden email]>
Reply-To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>, "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Date: Wednesday, June 13, 2018 at 2:06 AM
To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]>
Subject: [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on Groovy 3.0

 

External e-mail. Use caution! / Courriel externe. Faites attention!


 

Hi everyone,

 

There was some discussion at gr8conf about how to speed up delivery of Groovy 3.0. Some of that discussion was around the scope of what we want to include and have yet to complete in 3.0 but I won't discuss that right now.

 

One of the other discussion points was Groovy around 2.6. As many of you know, we have released alpha versions of Groovy 2.6. That version is a backport of most but not all of Groovy 3.0 to JDK7 including the Parrot parser (though it isn't enabled by default). The purpose of this version has always been to assist people/projects wanting to use the Parrot parser but who might be stuck on JDK7. So in some sense it is an intermediate version to assist with porting towards Groovy 3.0. While that is still a noble goal in theory, in practice, many of our users are already on JDK8 and we have limited resources to work on many potential areas.

 

With that in mind, we'd like to understand the preferences in our user base for the following two options:

 

Option 1: please continue releasing the best possible 2.6 even if that slows down the final release of Groovy 3.0 and delays further work on better support for JDK9+.

 

Option 2: please release one more alpha of 2.6 over the next month or so which will become the best version to use to assist porting for users stuck on JDK7 and then focus on 3.0. The 2.6 branch will essentially be retired though we will consider PRs from the community for critical fixes.

 

Feedback welcome.

 

Cheers, Paul.

 

 


MG
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on Groovy 3.0

MG
In reply to this post by paulk_asert
Option 2 or 3 from my side.
I have thought about this, and given the fast movement of the Java
universe at the moment it seems the right move, from a resources and
public perception point of view.

Also, Groovy 2.5 is not too shabby, so still being on JDK 7 it is not
like "no Groovy for you" ;-)

Cheers,
mg


On 6/13/2018 9:05 AM, Paul King wrote:

>
> Hi everyone,
>
> There was some discussion at gr8conf about how to speed up delivery of
> Groovy 3.0. Some of that discussion was around the scope of what we
> want to include and have yet to complete in 3.0 but I won't discuss
> that right now.
>
> One of the other discussion points was Groovy around 2.6. As many of
> you know, we have released alpha versions of Groovy 2.6. That version
> is a backport of most but not all of Groovy 3.0 to JDK7 including the
> Parrot parser (though it isn't enabled by default). The purpose of
> this version has always been to assist people/projects wanting to use
> the Parrot parser but who might be stuck on JDK7. So in some sense it
> is an intermediate version to assist with porting towards Groovy 3.0.
> While that is still a noble goal in theory, in practice, many of our
> users are already on JDK8 and we have limited resources to work on
> many potential areas.
>
> With that in mind, we'd like to understand the preferences in our user
> base for the following two options:
>
> Option 1: please continue releasing the best possible 2.6 even if that
> slows down the final release of Groovy 3.0 and delays further work on
> better support for JDK9+.
>
> Option 2: please release one more alpha of 2.6 over the next month or
> so which will become the best version to use to assist porting for
> users stuck on JDK7 and then focus on 3.0. The 2.6 branch will
> essentially be retired though we will consider PRs from the community
> for critical fixes.
>
> Feedback welcome.
>
> Cheers, Paul.
>
>

MG
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on Groovy 3.0

MG
In reply to this post by h2gr


On 6/13/2018 10:24 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
> (I may be alone on this one, but I'd even suggest to consider some of
> the Java syntax compatibility, if this helps speed up Groovy 3. If I
> need to write Java code, I can always put it in .java files.)

Java-syntax-compatibility-only-support in Groovy is not there to be used
by Groovy developers (see previous discussions about warning when using
these constructs), but to support copy & paste compatibility for people
considering switching from Java.
I understand where you are coming from, but imho the closesness to Java
always has been another strong argument for Groovy, and considering
supporting Java syntax constructs in Groovy 3.0 through the Parrot
parser seems pretty straightforward I think we should keep doing this.

An alternative would be to support a tool which auto-converts from Java
to Groovy (I would estimate this would be more effort, and it does not
really give the "copy & paste Java code and it is Groovy" experience).
Or IntelliJ/Eclipse/Netbeans could support this as part of their
respective code refactoring support...

Cheers,
mg


>
> Den 2018-06-13 10:08, skrev Mario Garcia:
>> I would say 3 as well
>>
>> 2018-06-13 10:04 GMT+02:00 Robert Oschwald <[hidden email]>:
>>
>>> Same with me. Option 3 seems best, even when some of our projects
>>> are still on Grails 2.
>>>
>>> Am 13.06.2018 um 09:50 schrieb Søren Berg Glasius
>>> <[hidden email]>:
>>> While the project I'm on is still on JDK 7, but due to Grails 2.x I
>>> think that option 3 is the best way to move forward (and nudge
>>> projects on to a higher version of Grails as well).
>>>
>>> /Søren
>>>
>>> On Wed, 13 Jun 2018, 09.42 , <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I agree on option 3 (abandon 2.6 immediately).
>>>
>>> JDK 6 or 7 is not in use anywhere that I have project visibility.
>>>
>>> Full support for JKD9+ is becoming a pressing issue. Users are
>>> concerned about the ability of Groovy to run on future JDK releases
>>> (including GraalVM), more than legacy support.
>>>
>>> Best Regards
>>>
>>> FROM: Paolo Di Tommaso [mailto:[hidden email]]
>>> SENT: Wednesday, June 13, 2018 3:18 AM
>>> TO: [hidden email]
>>> SUBJECT: Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on
>>> Groovy 3.0
>>>
>>> I agree on option 3 (abandon 2.6 immediately).
>>>
>>> Full support for JKD9+ is becoming a pressing issue. Users are
>>> concerned about the ability of Groovy to run on future JDK releases
>>> (including GraalVM), more than legacy support.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>>
>>> p
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 9:11 AM, David Dawson
>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> I would vote 2.
>>>
>>> Actually, i would vote 3) abandon 2.6 immediately.
>>>
>>> No projects I have any knowledge of still use jdk 7.
>>>
>>> FROM: [hidden email]
>>>
>>> SENT: 13 June 2018 08:06
>>>
>>> TO: [hidden email]
>>>
>>> REPLY TO: [hidden email]
>>>
>>> SUBJECT: [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on
>>> Groovy 3.0
>>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> There was some discussion at gr8conf about how to speed up delivery
>>> of Groovy 3.0. Some of that discussion was around the scope of what
>>> we want to include and have yet to complete in 3.0 but I won't
>>> discuss that right now.
>>>
>>> One of the other discussion points was Groovy around 2.6. As many of
>>> you know, we have released alpha versions of Groovy 2.6. That
>>> version is a backport of most but not all of Groovy 3.0 to JDK7
>>> including the Parrot parser (though it isn't enabled by default).
>>> The purpose of this version has always been to assist
>>> people/projects wanting to use the Parrot parser but who might be
>>> stuck on JDK7. So in some sense it is an intermediate version to
>>> assist with porting towards Groovy 3.0. While that is still a noble
>>> goal in theory, in practice, many of our users are already on JDK8
>>> and we have limited resources to work on many potential areas.
>>>
>>> With that in mind, we'd like to understand the preferences in our
>>> user base for the following two options:
>>>
>>> Option 1: please continue releasing the best possible 2.6 even if
>>> that slows down the final release of Groovy 3.0 and delays further
>>> work on better support for JDK9+.
>>>
>>> Option 2: please release one more alpha of 2.6 over the next month
>>> or so which will become the best version to use to assist porting
>>> for users stuck on JDK7 and then focus on 3.0. The 2.6 branch will
>>> essentially be retired though we will consider PRs from the
>>> community for critical fixes.
>>>
>>> Feedback welcome.
>>>
>>> Cheers, Paul.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Best regards / Med venlig hilsen,
>>>
>>> Søren Berg Glasius
>>>
>>> Hedevej 1, Gl. Rye, 8680 Ry, Denmark
>>> Mobile: +45 40 44 91 88, Skype: sbglasius
>>> --- Press ESC once to quit - twice to save the changes.
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on Groovy 3.0

h2gr
I did come from Java myself, and I understand the argument to ease the
transition from Java to Groovy, but as Java adopts language features
from Groovy, I worry that supporting both syntaxes will create a more
complex language with more options, more stuff to learn, and less
clarity.

Besides, in my experience developers are quite able to handle different
languages. Granted, Groovy should be easy to read and understand for
developers coming from Java (and other) languages, but not every
language feature in other languages need to be valid Groovy code as
well.

H2


Den 2018-06-13 17:24, skrev MG:

> On 6/13/2018 10:24 AM, [hidden email] wrote:
>> (I may be alone on this one, but I'd even suggest to consider some of
>> the Java syntax compatibility, if this helps speed up Groovy 3. If I
>> need to write Java code, I can always put it in .java files.)
>
> Java-syntax-compatibility-only-support in Groovy is not there to be
> used by Groovy developers (see previous discussions about warning when
> using these constructs), but to support copy & paste compatibility for
> people considering switching from Java.
> I understand where you are coming from, but imho the closesness to
> Java always has been another strong argument for Groovy, and
> considering supporting Java syntax constructs in Groovy 3.0 through
> the Parrot parser seems pretty straightforward I think we should keep
> doing this.
>
> An alternative would be to support a tool which auto-converts from
> Java to Groovy (I would estimate this would be more effort, and it
> does not really give the "copy & paste Java code and it is Groovy"
> experience). Or IntelliJ/Eclipse/Netbeans could support this as part
> of their respective code refactoring support...
>
> Cheers,
> mg
>
>
>>
>> Den 2018-06-13 10:08, skrev Mario Garcia:
>>> I would say 3 as well
>>>
>>> 2018-06-13 10:04 GMT+02:00 Robert Oschwald
>>> <[hidden email]>:
>>>
>>>> Same with me. Option 3 seems best, even when some of our projects
>>>> are still on Grails 2.
>>>>
>>>> Am 13.06.2018 um 09:50 schrieb Søren Berg Glasius
>>>> <[hidden email]>:
>>>> While the project I'm on is still on JDK 7, but due to Grails 2.x I
>>>> think that option 3 is the best way to move forward (and nudge
>>>> projects on to a higher version of Grails as well).
>>>>
>>>> /Søren
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, 13 Jun 2018, 09.42 , <[hidden email]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I agree on option 3 (abandon 2.6 immediately).
>>>>
>>>> JDK 6 or 7 is not in use anywhere that I have project visibility.
>>>>
>>>> Full support for JKD9+ is becoming a pressing issue. Users are
>>>> concerned about the ability of Groovy to run on future JDK releases
>>>> (including GraalVM), more than legacy support.
>>>>
>>>> Best Regards
>>>>
>>>> FROM: Paolo Di Tommaso [mailto:[hidden email]]
>>>> SENT: Wednesday, June 13, 2018 3:18 AM
>>>> TO: [hidden email]
>>>> SUBJECT: Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on
>>>> Groovy 3.0
>>>>
>>>> I agree on option 3 (abandon 2.6 immediately).
>>>>
>>>> Full support for JKD9+ is becoming a pressing issue. Users are
>>>> concerned about the ability of Groovy to run on future JDK releases
>>>> (including GraalVM), more than legacy support.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> p
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 9:11 AM, David Dawson
>>>> <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I would vote 2.
>>>>
>>>> Actually, i would vote 3) abandon 2.6 immediately.
>>>>
>>>> No projects I have any knowledge of still use jdk 7.
>>>>
>>>> FROM: [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>> SENT: 13 June 2018 08:06
>>>>
>>>> TO: [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>> REPLY TO: [hidden email]
>>>>
>>>> SUBJECT: [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on
>>>> Groovy 3.0
>>>>
>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>
>>>> There was some discussion at gr8conf about how to speed up delivery
>>>> of Groovy 3.0. Some of that discussion was around the scope of what
>>>> we want to include and have yet to complete in 3.0 but I won't
>>>> discuss that right now.
>>>>
>>>> One of the other discussion points was Groovy around 2.6. As many of
>>>> you know, we have released alpha versions of Groovy 2.6. That
>>>> version is a backport of most but not all of Groovy 3.0 to JDK7
>>>> including the Parrot parser (though it isn't enabled by default).
>>>> The purpose of this version has always been to assist
>>>> people/projects wanting to use the Parrot parser but who might be
>>>> stuck on JDK7. So in some sense it is an intermediate version to
>>>> assist with porting towards Groovy 3.0. While that is still a noble
>>>> goal in theory, in practice, many of our users are already on JDK8
>>>> and we have limited resources to work on many potential areas.
>>>>
>>>> With that in mind, we'd like to understand the preferences in our
>>>> user base for the following two options:
>>>>
>>>> Option 1: please continue releasing the best possible 2.6 even if
>>>> that slows down the final release of Groovy 3.0 and delays further
>>>> work on better support for JDK9+.
>>>>
>>>> Option 2: please release one more alpha of 2.6 over the next month
>>>> or so which will become the best version to use to assist porting
>>>> for users stuck on JDK7 and then focus on 3.0. The 2.6 branch will
>>>> essentially be retired though we will consider PRs from the
>>>> community for critical fixes.
>>>>
>>>> Feedback welcome.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers, Paul.
>>>>
>>>> -- Best regards / Med venlig hilsen,
>>>>
>>>> Søren Berg Glasius
>>>>
>>>> Hedevej 1, Gl. Rye, 8680 Ry, Denmark
>>>> Mobile: +45 40 44 91 88, Skype: sbglasius
>>>> --- Press ESC once to quit - twice to save the changes.
>>
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [DISCUSS] Groovy 2.6 potential retirement to focus on Groovy 3.0

Scott Hickey-2
In reply to this post by paulk_asert
I've have always appreciated the willingness of the Groovy team to recognize that enterprises can't always move quickly to current versions of Java. 

At Mutual of Omaha, we do have almost everything running on JDK 8 now. We are actively trying to get our few remaining Grails 2.x versions upgraded to a current version of Grails.

I don't think that focusing only on Groovy 3 at this point would adversely affect our company.


On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 2:06 AM Paul King <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hi everyone,

There was some discussion at gr8conf about how to speed up delivery of Groovy 3.0. Some of that discussion was around the scope of what we want to include and have yet to complete in 3.0 but I won't discuss that right now.

One of the other discussion points was Groovy around 2.6. As many of you know, we have released alpha versions of Groovy 2.6. That version is a backport of most but not all of Groovy 3.0 to JDK7 including the Parrot parser (though it isn't enabled by default). The purpose of this version has always been to assist people/projects wanting to use the Parrot parser but who might be stuck on JDK7. So in some sense it is an intermediate version to assist with porting towards Groovy 3.0. While that is still a noble goal in theory, in practice, many of our users are already on JDK8 and we have limited resources to work on many potential areas.

With that in mind, we'd like to understand the preferences in our user base for the following two options:

Option 1: please continue releasing the best possible 2.6 even if that slows down the final release of Groovy 3.0 and delays further work on better support for JDK9+.

Option 2: please release one more alpha of 2.6 over the next month or so which will become the best version to use to assist porting for users stuck on JDK7 and then focus on 3.0. The 2.6 branch will essentially be retired though we will consider PRs from the community for critical fixes.

Feedback welcome.

Cheers, Paul.


1234