flink-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jark Wu <j...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [POLL] Who still uses Java 7 with Flink ?
Date Thu, 13 Jul 2017 02:11:53 GMT
+1 for dropping Java 7

2017-07-13 9:34 GMT+08:00 ☼ R Nair (रविशंकर नायर) <
ravishankar.nair@gmail.com>:

> +1 for dropping Java 1.7.
>
> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 9:10 PM, Kurt Young <ykt836@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> +1 for droppint Java 7, we have been using Java 8 for more than one year
>> in Alibaba and everything work fine.
>>
>> Best,
>> Kurt
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 13, 2017 at 2:53 AM, Bowen Li <bowen.li@offerupnow.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 for dropping Java 7
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 9:04 AM, Gyula Fóra <gyula.fora@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> > +1 for dropping 1.7 from me as well.
>>> >
>>> > Gyula
>>> >
>>> > On Wed, Jul 12, 2017, 17:53 Ted Yu <yuzhihong@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > +1 on dropping support for Java 1.7
>>> > >
>>> > > -------- Original message --------
>>> > > From: Robert Metzger <rmetzger@apache.org>
>>> > > Date: 7/12/17 8:36 AM (GMT-08:00)
>>> > > To: dev@flink.apache.org
>>> > > Cc: user <user@flink.apache.org>
>>> > > Subject: Re: [POLL] Who still uses Java 7 with Flink ?
>>> > >
>>> > > +1 to drop Java 7 support
>>> > >
>>> > > I believe that we can move to Java 8 for the argument you've stated.
>>> > > ElasticSearch 5, Spark 2.2  require Java 8 already, Hadoop 3.0.0 will
>>> > > require it as well.
>>> > >
>>> > > On Wed, Jul 12, 2017 at 4:02 PM, Driesprong, Fokko
>>> <fokko@driesprong.frl
>>> > >
>>> > > wrote:
>>> > >
>>> > >> Hi,
>>> > >>
>>> > >> I would be in favor of dropping Java 7 as we don't use it in our
>>> hadoop
>>> > >> infra (and we are a bank). Also, Spark 2.2 has been released today,
>>> > >> which doesn't
>>> > >> support Java 7 <http://spark.apache.org/relea
>>> ses/spark-release-2-2-0.
>>> > html
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> anymore, and Flink should not lack behind :-)
>>> > >>
>>> > >> Cheers, Fokko
>>> > >>
>>> > >> 2017-07-12 15:56 GMT+02:00 Stephan Ewen <sewen@apache.org>:
>>> > >>
>>> > >> > Bumping this thread again.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > There are several strong points for dropping Java 7 support,
apart
>>> > from
>>> > >> the
>>> > >> > fact that it is not maintained
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> >   - We could really use the Java 8 default methods feature
in
>>> > >> interfaces to
>>> > >> > evolve the API without breaking backwards compatibility
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> >   - Easier build setup for Scala 2.12 (which requires Java
8), no
>>> need
>>> > >> to
>>> > >> > manage the tricky combinations of Java / Scala versions
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> >   - Ability to use vanilla Akka (rather than Flakka) which
>>> requires
>>> > >> Java 8.
>>> > >> >     - Fewer problems for users that use Akka in the Flink
>>> applications
>>> > >> >     - Flakka currently does not support Scala 2.12
>>> > >> >     - Newer Akka versions shade protobuf, which is important
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > I think these together make a pretty good case for bumping
the
>>> > required
>>> > >> > Java version to Java 8.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > It would just help both Flink users (dependency management,
Scala
>>> > >> versions)
>>> > >> > and developers (build simplification) a lot.
>>> > >> > Unless we see users stepping forward and making a case that
it
>>> will be
>>> > >> > impossible for them to upgrade to Java 8, I suggest to go
forward
>>> with
>>> > >> > this.
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > Best,
>>> > >> > Stephan
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:36 PM, Haohui Mai <ricetons@gmail.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> > >> >
>>> > >> > > +1
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > > There are several high impacts security vulnerabilities
in JDK
>>> 7 and
>>> > >> will
>>> > >> > > not be addressed.
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > > As a result we completely moved away from JDK 7.
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > > +1 on separating the tasks of supporting Scala 2.12 and
JDK 8
>>> in two
>>> > >> > steps.
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > > On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 9:53 AM Greg Hogan <code@greghogan.com>
>>> > wrote:
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> > > > Is this not two different issues?
>>> > >> > > > - adding builds for Scala 2.12
>>> > >> > > > - upgrading to Java version 1.8
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > > It may be time to switch, but I haven’t seen anything
in
>>> > FLINK-5005
>>> > >> > which
>>> > >> > > > prevents simply adding Scala 2.12 to our supported
build
>>> matrix
>>> > and
>>> > >> > > > continuing to build 2.10 / 2.11 against Java 1.7.
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > > Greg
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > > > On Jun 8, 2017, at 11:39 AM, Robert Metzger
<
>>> > rmetzger@apache.org>
>>> > >> > > wrote:
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > > Hi all,
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > > as promised in March, I want to revive this
discussion!
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > > Our users are begging for Scala 2.12 support
[1], migration
>>> to
>>> > >> Akka
>>> > >> > 2.4
>>> > >> > > > would solve a bunch of shading / dependency issues
(Akka 2.4
>>> will
>>> > >> > remove
>>> > >> > > > Akka's protobuf dependency [2][3]) and generally
Java 8's new
>>> > >> language
>>> > >> > > > features all speak for dropping Java 7.
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > > Java 8 has been released in March, 2014. Java
7 is
>>> unsupported
>>> > >> since
>>> > >> > > > June 2016.
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > > So what's the feeling in the community regarding
the step?
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5005#
<
>>> > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5005#>
>>> > >> > > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5989
<
>>> > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-5989>
>>> > >> > > > > [3]
>>> > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-3211?
>>> > >> > > focusedCommentId=15274018&page=com.atlassian.jira.
>>> > >> > > plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15274018
>>> > >> > > > <
>>> > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLINK-3211?
>>> > >> > > focusedCommentId=15274018&page=com.atlassian.jira.
>>> > >> > > plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-15274018
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 2:42 PM, Theodore Vasiloudis
<
>>> > >> > > > theodoros.vasiloudis@gmail.com <mailto:
>>> > >> theodoros.vasiloudis@gmail.com
>>> > >> > >>
>>> > >> > > > wrote:
>>> > >> > > > > Hello all,
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > > I'm sure you've considered this already, but
what this data
>>> does
>>> > >> not
>>> > >> > > > include is all the potential future users,
>>> > >> > > > > i.e. slower moving organizations (banks etc.)
which could
>>> be on
>>> > >> Java
>>> > >> > 7
>>> > >> > > > still.
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > > Whether those are relevant is up for debate.
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > > Cheers,
>>> > >> > > > > Theo
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:14 PM, Robert Metzger
<
>>> > >> > rmetzger@apache.org
>>> > >> > > > <mailto:rmetzger@apache.org>> wrote:
>>> > >> > > > > Yeah, you are right :)
>>> > >> > > > > I'll put something in my calendar for end of
May.
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > > On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 12:12 PM, Greg Hogan
<
>>> > code@greghogan.com
>>> > >> > > > <mailto:code@greghogan.com>> wrote:
>>> > >> > > > > Robert,
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > > Thanks for the report. Shouldn’t we be revisiting
this
>>> decision
>>> > at
>>> > >> > the
>>> > >> > > > beginning of the new release cycle rather than near
the end?
>>> There
>>> > >> is
>>> > >> > > > currently little cost to staying with Java 7 since
no Flink
>>> code
>>> > or
>>> > >> > pull
>>> > >> > > > requests have been written for Java 8.
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > > Greg
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > >> On Mar 23, 2017, at 6:37 AM, Robert Metzger
<
>>> > rmetzger@apache.org
>>> > >> > > > <mailto:rmetzger@apache.org>> wrote:
>>> > >> > > > >>
>>> > >> > > > >> Looks like 9% on twitter and 24% on the
mailing list are
>>> still
>>> > >> using
>>> > >> > > > Java 7.
>>> > >> > > > >>
>>> > >> > > > >> I would vote to keep supporting Java 7
for Flink 1.3 and
>>> then
>>> > >> > revisit
>>> > >> > > > once we are approaching 1.4 in September.
>>> > >> > > > >>
>>> > >> > > > >> On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 8:00 AM, Bowen
Li <
>>> > >> bowen.li@offerupnow.com
>>> > >> > > > <mailto:bowen.li@offerupnow.com>> wrote:
>>> > >> > > > >> There's always a tradeoff we need to make.
I'm in favor of
>>> > >> upgrading
>>> > >> > > to
>>> > >> > > > Java 8 to bring in all new Java features.
>>> > >> > > > >>
>>> > >> > > > >> The common way I've seen (and I agree)
other software
>>> upgrading
>>> > >> > major
>>> > >> > > > things like this is 1) upgrade for next big release
without
>>> > backward
>>> > >> > > > compatibility and notify everyone 2) maintain and
patch
>>> current,
>>> > >> > old-tech
>>> > >> > > > compatible version at a reasonably limited scope.
Building
>>> > backward
>>> > >> > > > compatibility is too much for an open sourced project
>>> > >> > > > >>
>>> > >> > > > >>
>>> > >> > > > >>
>>> > >> > > > >> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 7:10 AM, Robert
Metzger <
>>> > >> > rmetzger@apache.org
>>> > >> > > > <mailto:rmetzger@apache.org>> wrote:
>>> > >> > > > >> I've put it also on our Twitter account:
>>> > >> > > > >> https://twitter.com/ApacheFlink/status/842015062667755521
>>> <
>>> > >> > > > https://twitter.com/ApacheFlink/status/842015062667755521>
>>> > >> > > > >>
>>> > >> > > > >> On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 2:19 PM, Martin
Neumann <
>>> > >> > martin.neumann@ri.se
>>> > >> > > > <mailto:martin.neumann@ri.se>>
>>> > >> > > > >> wrote:
>>> > >> > > > >>
>>> > >> > > > >> > I think this easier done in a straw
poll than in an email
>>> > >> > > > conversation.
>>> > >> > > > >> > I created one at: http://www.strawpoll.me/12535073
<
>>> > >> > > > http://www.strawpoll.me/12535073>
>>> > >> > > > >> > (Note that you have multiple choices.)
>>> > >> > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > > >> > Though I prefer Java 8 most of the
time I have to work on
>>> > Java
>>> > >> 7.
>>> > >> > A
>>> > >> > > > lot of
>>> > >> > > > >> > the infrastructure I work on still
runs Java 7, one of
>>> the
>>> > >> > > companies I
>>> > >> > > > >> > build a prototype for a while back
just updated to Java
>>> 7 2
>>> > >> years
>>> > >> > > > ago. I
>>> > >> > > > >> > doubt we can ditch Java 7 support
any time soon if we
>>> want to
>>> > >> make
>>> > >> > > it
>>> > >> > > > easy
>>> > >> > > > >> > for companies to use Flink.
>>> > >> > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > > >> > cheers Martin
>>> > >> > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > > >> > //PS sorry if this gets sent twice,
we just migrated to
>>> a new
>>> > >> mail
>>> > >> > > > system
>>> > >> > > > >> > and a lot of things are broken
>>> > >> > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > > >> > ________________________________
>>> > >> > > > >> > From: Stephan Ewen <sewen@apache.org
<mailto:
>>> > sewen@apache.org
>>> > >> >>
>>> > >> > > > >> > Sent: Wednesday, March 15, 2017 12:30:24
PM
>>> > >> > > > >> > To: user@flink.apache.org <mailto:user@flink.apache.org>
>>> ;
>>> > >> > > > dev@flink.apache.org <mailto:dev@flink.apache.org>
>>> > >> > > > >> > Subject: [POLL] Who still uses Java
7 with Flink ?
>>> > >> > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > > >> > Hi all!
>>> > >> > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > > >> > I would like to get a feeling how
much Java 7 is still
>>> being
>>> > >> used
>>> > >> > > > among
>>> > >> > > > >> > Flink users.
>>> > >> > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > > >> > At some point, it would be great to
drop Java 7 support
>>> and
>>> > >> make
>>> > >> > use
>>> > >> > > > of
>>> > >> > > > >> > Java 8's new features, but first we
would need to get a
>>> > feeling
>>> > >> > how
>>> > >> > > > much
>>> > >> > > > >> > Java 7 is still used.
>>> > >> > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > > >> > Would be happy if users on Java 7
respond here, or even
>>> users
>>> > >> that
>>> > >> > > > have
>>> > >> > > > >> > some insights into how widespread
they think Java 7
>>> still is.
>>> > >> > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > > >> > Thanks,
>>> > >> > > > >> > Stephan
>>> > >> > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > > >> >
>>> > >> > > > >>
>>> > >> > > > >>
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > > >
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > > >
>>> > >> > >
>>> > >> >
>>> > >>
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
>

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