Drop java 8 support (?)

[Rollczi]

No description provided.

[huanmeng-qwq]

This is fatal for lower versions of Minecraft

[CarmJos]

Higher versions of Java have many pleasant features, but this is devastating to lower version games (minigames and PVP servers that still exist in large numbers).

[KermanIsPretty]

I think Lite Commands should update to atleast Java 17 following ViaVersion. Most Minigame/PvP servers already run a fork of the notchian server that can be updated or already support J17. Also if it is required lite commands can include a version that uses https://github.com/unimined/JvmDowngrader. I would love to see J21 support to utilize virtual threads, but its not a requirement.

[CarmJos]

I think Lite Commands should update to atleast Java 17 following ViaVersion. Most Minigame/PvP servers already run a fork of the notchian server that can be updated or already support J17. Also if it is required lite commands can include a version that uses https://github.com/unimined/JvmDowngrader. I would love to see J21 support to utilize virtual threads, but its not a requirement.

Maybe you are right. But ProtocolLib says NO.

[Rollczi]

I think Lite Commands should update to atleast Java 17 following ViaVersion. Most Minigame/PvP servers already run a fork of the notchian server that can be updated or already support J17. Also if it is required lite commands can include a version that uses https://github.com/unimined/JvmDowngrader. I would love to see J21 support to utilize virtual threads, but its not a requirement.

Maybe you are right. But ProtocolLib says NO.

What do you mean?

[CarmJos]

Owner Author

ProtocolLib for 1.8.8~1.12 alwasy drop errors if not using Java8 even using "Downgrader"

[CarmJos]

I think Lite Commands should update to atleast Java 17 following ViaVersion. Most Minigame/PvP servers already run a fork of the notchian server that can be updated or already support J17. Also if it is required lite commands can include a version that uses https://github.com/unimined/JvmDowngrader. I would love to see J21 support to utilize virtual threads, but its not a requirement.

Maybe you are right. But ProtocolLib says NO.

What do you mean?

Of course, no matter what, I also strongly support LiteCommands upgrading to at least j17.

The new version of Java brings many syntax and performance advantages.

[KermanIsPretty]

Any news on this? This would be an awesome change for the longevity of this project to update to at least Java 17. (21 preferred)

[Rollczi]

I'm in favor of this idea, but I'm currently involved in other functions