Portability to Java 6 support

[fredericBregier]

This framework should be able to be binary compatible with Java 6 as Netty does. This merge request allows minor changes to be able to be compatible.

Also it upgrades dependencies.

All changes made by @marakiis

Issue reference #73

[googlebot]

Thanks for your pull request. It looks like this may be your first contribution to a Google open source project (if not, look below for help). Before we can look at your pull request, you'll need to sign a Contributor License Agreement (CLA).

:memo: Please visit https://cla.developers.google.com/ to sign.

Once you've signed (or fixed any issues), please reply here (e.g. I signed it!) and we'll verify it.

---

What to do if you already signed the CLA

Individual signers

• It's possible we don't have your GitHub username or you're using a different email address on your commit. Check your existing CLA data and verify that your email is set on your git commits.

Corporate signers

• Your company has a Point of Contact who decides which employees are authorized to participate. Ask your POC to be added to the group of authorized contributors. If you don't know who your Point of Contact is, direct the Google project maintainer to go/cla#troubleshoot (Public version).
• The email used to register you as an authorized contributor must be the email used for the Git commit. Check your existing CLA data and verify that your email is set on your git commits.
• The email used to register you as an authorized contributor must also be attached to your GitHub account.

ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info.

[fredericBregier]

Signed the CLA @marakiis Maybe you should too

[googlebot]

CLAs look good, thanks!

ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info.

[fredericBregier]

I looked at the build from travis: it seems broken for long time, but on maven specification

<packaging>bundle</packaging>

So not related to this pull request.

[fredericBregier]

I correct this PR as your review. I unterstand that keeping Java6 compatibility is a bit "old", but we (in our project) will move to Java7 and upward next year. In the meantime, we need Java6 compatibility. We hope those changes are very small and not being too ugly.

[chtyim]

It is better not to merge to develop branch, but rather a special branch for java 6 support only, so that we can release a special artifact for Java 6 only. In this way, it won’t affect the regular release of the Java 8 code base

[fredericBregier]

@chtyim Why not... As you wish. I will wait for your guidance.

The idea is to benefit of the project and to participate as much as we can too.

Maybe we could make after another PR with only the dependencies upgrade and the add of OPTIONS on develop?

[googlebot]

We found a Contributor License Agreement for you (the sender of this pull request), but were unable to find agreements for all the commit author(s) or Co-authors. If you authored these, maybe you used a different email address in the git commits than was used to sign the CLA (login here to double check)? If these were authored by someone else, then they will need to sign a CLA as well, and confirm that they're okay with these being contributed to Google. In order to pass this check, please resolve this problem and then comment @googlebot I fixed it.. If the bot doesn't comment, it means it doesn't think anything has changed.

ℹ️ Googlers: Go here for more info.

[fatso83]

Time to close this perhaps seeing it is moving nowhere? Too bad about the effort involved, but guessing Fred used this locally and has since upgraded the project to Java 7 (or 17?) 😄