accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sean Busbey <bus...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Java 8
Date Thu, 18 Aug 2016 22:49:42 GMT
I'm all for moving us towards java 8+ only, but I'm still -1 on
dropping java 7 in a minor release. Plenty of folks still run Java 7
in production. I'm sure a non-zero number of them will want to update
versions and a major version is how we communicate that level of
expected disruption.

How about we get 1.8 out the door with Java 7 + Java 8, then try to
get master out the door with Java 8 as the minimum version? What's the
blocker on a release from master now?

On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 5:46 PM, Christopher <ctubbsii@apache.org> wrote:
> We need to make sure this release works with Java 8 anyway... but this
> change would tighten things up a bit, so we don't have to worry about
> supporting Java 7. It narrows our testing and allows us to focus on just
> the non-EOL, modern Java versions that we should be realistically expecting
> users of Accumulo 1.8 to be using anyway.
>
> On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 6:37 PM Josh Elser <josh.elser@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Err, I am not a big fan of making this change after two rc's and all of
>> the testing I've been babysitting this week.
>>
>> I have no problem with you spinning a 2.0 which is 99% similar to 1.8
>> with whatever else you'd like to do (in fact, I'd encourage anyone to
>> step up and drive 2.0 to release).
>>
>> Sean Busbey wrote:
>> > Why don't we just make the 1.8 branch 2.0 then? I really don't want to
>> > drop support for JDKs on non-major releases; it's super disruptive.
>> >
>> > On Thu, Aug 18, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Christopher<ctubbsii@apache.org>
>> wrote:
>> >> I know we've talked about this before, but I kind of want to just use
>> Java
>> >> 8 for Accumulo 1.8. It'd help clean up some things in the build (can
>> make
>> >> use of newer versions of build plugins, and make it easier for new
>> >> development against the latest release).
>> >>
>> >> I just don't know how reasonable it is to keep making new, non-bugfix
>> >> releases on EOL JDKs (even though I may have previously argued that
>> it'd be
>> >> safer to just wait until a major version bump).
>> >
>> >
>> >
>>



-- 
busbey

Mime
View raw message