accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christopher <ctubb...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Minimum JDK in 1.6.1
Date Fri, 20 Jun 2014 22:08:07 GMT
Okay, thanks for the responses. It's pretty clear that bumping to JRE 7 as
a minimum is unacceptable for 1.6.x, and that's understandable.

At this point, I think it would be best to back off to Jetty 8 for 1.6.x,
and created a ticket (ACCUMULO-2934) to do that.

Feel free to continue the discussion if there's any new thoughts. I'll not
be able to work on ACCUMULO-2934 over the weekend anyway, and I'll check
back here before I do.


--
Christopher L Tubbs II
http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii


On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Bill Havanki <bhavanki@clouderagovt.com>
wrote:

> +1 for option 2, -1 for option 1 ... in other words, keep Accumulo 1.6.x at
> Java 6. As a cluster admin I'd be unpleasantly surprised to find that I
> need to update Java versions for a minor/bugfix (whatever we call it)
> release.
>
> I am happy with the idea of moving to Jetty 8 for 1.6.x as part of
> ACCUMULO-2786. Originally the ticket didn't call for upgrading Jetty, but
> just getting its libraries included in packaging, but at this point, it's
> sensible and more responsible to upgrade too.
>
>
> On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 5:39 PM, Christopher <ctubbsii@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > More data points to consider:
> >
> > mortbay Jetty has known security vulnerabilities (albeit relatively low
> > ones)
> >
> >
> http://www.cvedetails.com/vulnerability-list/vendor_id-9694/product_id-17330/Mortbay-Jetty.html
> >
> > Jetty 6 was announced as deprecated in January 2012 (for some performance
> > and security issues)
> > http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/jetty-announce/msg00026.html
> >
> > Another option is to bump down to Jetty 8 for 1.6.x, which might be a
> > smaller change that would keep us on JRE 6, and still satisfy
> > ACCUMULO-2786.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Christopher L Tubbs II
> > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 5:27 PM, Sean Busbey <busbey@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > > strong -1 on option 1; 1.6.0 went out with Java 6 as a minimum and we
> > > should not change that in the major release.
> > >
> > > +1 on option 2.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 5:22 PM, Mike Drob <madrob@cloudera.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1 for option 2.
> > > >
> > > > We promised users that they can use Java 6 for 1.6.0 and it would be
> > very
> > > > jarring to suddenly require 1.7.0.
> > > >
> > > > April 2015 is a long time away, and I'm not sure that the world will
> > > > migrate quickly, given how long it took for Java 7 adoption.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Christopher <ctubbsii@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > As pointed out by Dave on ACCUMULO-2808, it looks like
> ACCUMULO-2808
> > /
> > > > > ACCUMULO-2786 causes the monitor to require Java 7.
> > > > >
> > > > > Personally, I'm okay with this, but obviously this was not expected
> > or
> > > > > intended.
> > > > >
> > > > > Since we're still targeting Java 6 in our Accumulo build, the other
> > > > > Accumulo services will still run in JRE6, and our code is still
> JRE6
> > > > > compatible (even if we build with JDK7). If building with JDK7
> fixed
> > > the
> > > > > issue and produced a monitor service that ran fine in JRE6, I'd say
> > no
> > > > > problem: we build with JDK7, while targeting JRE6. However, I don't
> > > think
> > > > > that will work. I think the monitor will just fail at runtime
> rather
> > > than
> > > > > compile time (if somebody has time to check, I'd appreciate
> > > > confirmation).
> > > > >
> > > > > So, our choices seem to be:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1. Make note of this requirement in the release notes for 1.6.1 and
> > > > target
> > > > > JRE7 in future 1.6 builds, or
> > > > > 2. Back out the changes for ACCUMULO-2808 from 1.6.1, and redo
> > > > > ACCUMULO-2786 with some other implementation.
> > > > >
> > > > > (It should be noted that Java 7 is expected to be EOL in April
> 2015;
> > > the
> > > > > announcement was already made, so people should be migrating to 8
> > > > already,
> > > > > if possible)
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Christopher L Tubbs II
> > > > > http://gravatar.com/ctubbsii
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Sean
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> // Bill Havanki
> // Solutions Architect, Cloudera Govt Solutions
> // 443.686.9283
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message