Mailing-List: contact cloudstack-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of Alex.Huang@citrix.com
 designates 66.165.176.63 as permitted sender)
From: Alex Huang <Alex.Huang@citrix.com>
To: "cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org"
	<cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org>
CC: Noa Resare <noa@spotify.com>, Frank Zhang <Frank.Zhang@citrix.com>, Sudha
 Ponnaganti <sudha.ponnaganti@citrix.com>, Kelven Yang
	<kelven.yang@citrix.com>
Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 13:50:30 -0800
Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Supported Java version
Thread-Topic: [DISCUSS] Supported Java version
Thread-Index: Ac4UalCgrJakHVKzQJyySpVnDBtQCAAACb3w
Message-ID: 
 <B1DF26ECC0458748AC97CECE2DA98D41013175648DE3@SJCPMAILBOX01.citrite.net>
References: <512B49BB.8040404@widodh.nl>
 <20130225150001.GC81779@USLT-205755.sungardas.corp>
 <CANc7MVyAJOPD=ca7q2a9h=3YQDuYWNc_69M4HoxMCDTi5kR3gQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <21455F1B-E0F9-44BC-8B9A-6FD3839D51F1@basho.com>
 <CANc7MVwi6NWBnLS_B1i74_ic_zdJVh_OsJVMVKHsEKv3rgewdQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <B1DF26ECC0458748AC97CECE2DA98D41013175648DBD@SJCPMAILBOX01.citrite.net>
 <58916DAC-488B-4AB6-87A1-799C06C4F9A5@basho.com>
In-Reply-To: <58916DAC-488B-4AB6-87A1-799C06C4F9A5@basho.com>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0

John,

I hate to see us disagree if even our agreements are violent!  :) (he he...=
I know what violent agreement means but just couldn't resist.)

The reason I brought this up is that Wido said in the original message that=
 4.1 now no longer compiles under 1.6 and must use 1.7 to compile.  That we=
've gotta fix. =20

I cced Sudha so she can plan to test with JRE 7.
I cced Kelven because it's his IPC code that causes this problem with 1.6.

I've gotta say that I've been running with 1.7 and so far no problems.  So =
I don't really expect problems.

--Alex

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Burwell [mailto:jburwell@basho.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 1:43 PM
> To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Cc: Noa Resare; Frank Zhang
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Supported Java version
>=20
> Alex,
>=20
> I think we are in violent agreement.  I am only advocating for a build te=
sted
> on JRE7, and listed as officially supported in our docs.  Using the Java7
> features is a completely different discussion.
>=20
> Thanks,
> -John
>=20
> On Feb 26, 2013, at 3:52 PM, Alex Huang <alex.huang@citrix.com> wrote:
>=20
> > +1 That's exactly what I said in my reply as well.  Support for Java7 m=
eans
> we test with JRE7 in 4.1 but support for Java7 does not mean we should pu=
sh
> for deprecating JRE6 support.
> >
> > --Alex
> >
> > From: Noa Resare [mailto:noa@spotify.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 12:35 PM
> > To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
> > Cc: Frank Zhang; Alex Huang
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Supported Java version
> >
> > java 6 may be end-of-line'd by Oracle, but the OpenJDK is shipping as p=
art
> of the enterprise distributions and as such will be supported in i.e. Deb=
ian
> Wheezy for at least years into the future.
> >
> > I'm not talking about not supporting java 7, the java ecosystem has
> traditionally been very good at supporting code targeting current_version=
 - 1,
> but I propose we avoid using language features and quirks that break java=
 6
> compatibility.
> >
> > /n
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 5:04 PM, John Burwell
> <jburwell@basho.com<mailto:jburwell@basho.com>> wrote:
> > Noa,
> >
> > I think of one very good reason -- as of this month, Java6 has been EOL=
'ed
> [1] by Oracle (i.e. no more updates).  Given the number of security issue=
s
> that have cropped in Java lately, it seems prudent, in my mind, to ensure=
 that
> the next release runs on an officially supported JRE.  Also, OpenJDK 7 is
> widely available for modern distributions (see openjdk-7 packages in Ubun=
tu
> 12.04 and java-1.7.0-openjdk in RHEL/CentOS 6.3).
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -John
> >
> > [1]: http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html
> > On Feb 25, 2013, at 10:24 AM, Noa Resare
> <noa@spotify.com<mailto:noa@spotify.com>> wrote:
> >
> >> Unless someone comes with a very good argument to drop java 6
> >> compatibility (and make a good case for it in in public and gather
> >> consensus) I would consider this a bug that needs to be fixed.
> >>
> >> /noa
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 4:00 PM, Chip Childers
> <chip.childers@sungard.com<mailto:chip.childers@sungard.com>>wrote:
> >>
> >>> I didn't think that we agreed to bumping the java version to 7, and
> >>> it seems like that might make working with distros / packages difficu=
lt.
> >>>
> >>> Adding Alex and Frank to the CC to get their take.
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 12:23:39PM +0100, Wido den Hollander wrote:
> >>>> Hi,
> >>>>
> >>>> So the last couple of days the master branch wouldn't build on my
> >>> systems:
> >>>>
> >>>> [INFO] Apache CloudStack Framework - IPC ................. FAILURE
> >>> [1.874s]
> >>>> ...
> >>>> ...
> >>>> [INFO]
> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> ----
> >>>> [ERROR] Failed to execute goal
> >>>> org.apache.maven.plugins:maven-compiler-plugin:2.5.1:compile
> >>>> (default-compile) on project cloud-framework-ipc: Compilation
> >>>> failure: Compilation failure:
> >>>> [ERROR]
> >>>
> /home/employee/wido/repos/cloudstack/framework/ipc/src/org/apache/cl
> >>> oudstack/framework/rpc/RpcServerCallImpl.java:[51,58]
> >>>> type parameters of <T>T cannot be determined; no unique maximal
> >>>> instance exists for type variable T with upper bounds
> >>>> T,java.lang.Object [ERROR]
> >>>
> /home/employee/wido/repos/cloudstack/framework/ipc/src/org/apache/cl
> >>> oudstack/framework/rpc/RpcClientCallImpl.java:[191,60]
> >>>> type parameters of <T>T cannot be determined; no unique maximal
> >>>> instance exists for type variable T with upper bounds
> >>>> T,java.lang.Object
> >>>>
> >>>> So I'm running Ubuntu 12.04.1 on all my systems (laptop, desktop,
> >>>> servers) and this is the maven information:
> >>>>
> >>>> wido@wido-desktop:~$ mvn -v
> >>>> Apache Maven 3.0.4
> >>>> Maven home: /usr/share/maven
> >>>> Java version: 1.6.0_27, vendor: Sun Microsystems Inc.
> >>>> Java home: /usr/lib/jvm/java-6-openjdk-amd64/jre
> >>>> Default locale: en_US, platform encoding: UTF-8 OS name: "linux",
> >>>> version: "3.2.0-38-generic", arch: "amd64", family:
> >>> "unix"
> >>>> wido@wido-desktop:~$
> >>>>
> >>>> Now, that Java version is old, I know, but it's the openjdk version
> >>>> which is in Ubuntu 12.04's repositories right now.
> >>>>
> >>>> I downloaded Java 7:
> >>>>
> >>>> wido@wido-
> desktop:~/repos/cloudstack$ JAVA_HOME=3D"/opt/jdk1.7.0_15"
> >>>> mvn
> >>> -v
> >>>> Apache Maven 3.0.4
> >>>> Maven home: /usr/share/maven
> >>>> Java version: 1.7.0_15, vendor: Oracle Corporation Java home:
> >>>> /opt/jdk1.7.0_15/jre Default locale: en_US, platform encoding:
> >>>> UTF-8 OS name: "linux", version: "3.2.0-38-generic", arch: "amd64",
> >>>> family:
> >>> "unix"
> >>>> wido@wido-desktop:~/repos/cloudstack$
> >>>>
> >>>> With that Java version the master branch builds just fine.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> What I want to discuss which version of Java we support.
> >>>>
> >>>> I'd say we support the LTS version of any major release of CentOS
> >>>> or
> >>> Ubuntu.
> >>>>
> >>>> I also understand that Java 6 is pretty old, so what do we do?
> >>>>
> >>>> Wido
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Engineering Experience, Infrastructure tribe, Spotify
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Engineering Experience, Infrastructure tribe, Spotify
> >