Re: [DISCUSS] Minimum version for Groovy 6

I also like the idea of going with 17.
Of course, we don't yet really know when Groovy will be released, but it
sounds like a safe version to base it on, without cutting with users who
may not have migrated beyond 17.



*Guillaume Laforge*
Apache Groovy committer
Developer Advocate @ Google Cloud <https://cloud.google.com/>

   - Blog: glaforge.dev
   - X: @glaforge <http://twitter.com/glaforge>
   - Bluesky: @glaforge.dev <https://bsky.app/profile/glaforge.dev>
   - Mastodon: @[email protected] <http://%[email protected]/>


Le dim. 24 août 2025, 12:58, Andres Almiray <[email protected]> a écrit :

> Sounds doable, considering that Maven 4 will also use Java 17.
>
> They have long discussed whether jumping to 21 should be the case as they
> want to support the last 2 LTS. With Java 25 coming closer (next month)
> there's a group pushing for jumping to 21.
> In our case I think staying with 17 is OK.
>
> Cheers,
> Andres
>
> On Sun, Aug 24, 2025 at 12:44 PM Paul King <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> Now that 5 is out, I created a GROOVY_5_0_X branch, and master has become
>> Groovy 6.
>>
>> We should discuss a minimum JDK version we plan to support for Groovy 6.
>>
>> My current thinking is that since we are typically very conservative with
>> the minimum version, we should bump to JDK17. I am hoping Groovy 6 will be
>> delivered with a quicker window than Groovy 5, but there hasn't been any
>> discussion about features as yet, so it's a little hard to predict. I think
>> JDK17 gives us a nice increment where we can make numerous advances, and if
>> the release is taking longer than we expected, we can always adjust our
>> decision. But, I'm interested in what others think ...
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers, Paul.
>>
>>