incubator-cloudstack-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sudha Ponnaganti <sudha.ponnaga...@citrix.com>
Subject RE: [DISCUSS] Supported Java version
Date Tue, 26 Feb 2013 22:14:03 GMT
However, can you confirm that none of the features depend on JRE and the impact is low if we
use 1.7.


-----Original Message-----
From: Sudha Ponnaganti [mailto:sudha.ponnaganti@citrix.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 2:09 PM
To: Alex Huang; cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc: Noa Resare; Frank Zhang; Kelven Yang
Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Supported Java version

I have been reviewing this mail thread to see the impact.  So far we haven't used 1.7 but
if this is confirmed then we will include it in the matrix to be covered

-----Original Message-----
From: Alex Huang
Sent: Tuesday, February 26, 2013 1:51 PM
To: cloudstack-dev@incubator.apache.org
Cc: Noa Resare; Frank Zhang; Sudha Ponnaganti; Kelven Yang
Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] Supported Java version

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.  

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
> 
> Alex,
> 
> I think we are in violent agreement.  I am only advocating for a build 
> tested on JRE7, and listed as officially supported in our docs.  Using 
> the Java7 features is a completely different discussion.
> 
> Thanks,
> -John
> 
> On Feb 26, 2013, at 3:52 PM, Alex Huang <alex.huang@citrix.com> wrote:
> 
> > +1 That's exactly what I said in my reply as well.  Support for
> > +Java7 means
> we test with JRE7 in 4.1 but support for Java7 does not mean we should 
> push 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 part
> of the enterprise distributions and as such will be supported in i.e. 
> Debian 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 
> issues 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 Ubuntu
> 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 difficult.
> >>>
> >>> 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="/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
> >


Mime
View raw message