Arrow is used by a couple of projects like Apache Parquet and Apache Iceberg which are still compiled with Java 8. Not a fully OSS project, but Dremio is built with Java 11 and I don't see us migrating to Java 17 until next year.
I'm still working on building Arrow with a more recent version of Java (hopefully will post a WIP in the following days) and that could help with the custom maven plugin (although to be honest, I'm still wondering the value of Arrow being JPMS compatible whereas other projects are not) On Fri, May 3, 2024 at 6:40 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> wrote: > Hi Dane, > > Rethinking about that, it would make sense to jump to Java 17 > directly, and align the projects. > I checked and we don't have Jakarta namespace use in Arrow (or > dependencies), that was my main concern. > > +1 to go to 17. I can help on this front ;) > > Regards > JB > > On Tue, Apr 30, 2024 at 4:17 PM Dane Pitkin > <d...@voltrondata.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > Thanks, JB. Are we aware of any downstream dependencies that would > benefit > > from maintaining Java 11 support? Apache Spark jumped straight to Java > 17. > > It seems other projects are dropping both 8 and 11 at the same time as > > mentioned by Fokko. From a maintenance perspective, it would be nice to > > drop both. > > > > On Mon, Apr 29, 2024 at 11:20 AM Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi > > > > > > I think it's time to drop JDK8 support. I would say that we should > > > keep Java11 (jumping directly to Java17 would be problematic > > > potentially for some users I guess). > > > > > > Regards > > > JB > > > > > > On Thu, Apr 25, 2024 at 10:21 PM James Duong > > > <james.du...@improving.com.invalid> wrote: > > > > > > > > If we dropped JDK 8, we could use the JDK to compile module-info.java > > > files. Then we could remove the custom maven plugin we’re using for > > > compiling module-info.java files for JPMS support and get better IDE > > > integration (as what we’re doing currently somewhat shoe-horns module > > > information alongside JDK8 bytecode). > > > > > > > > From: Dane Pitkin <d...@voltrondata.com.INVALID> > > > > Date: Thursday, April 25, 2024 at 1:02 PM > > > > To: dev@arrow.apache.org <dev@arrow.apache.org> > > > > Subject: [DISCUSS] Drop Java 8 support > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > > > I would like to revisit the discussion of dropping Java 8 (and maybe > 11) > > > > from Arrow's Java implementation. See GH issue[1] below. This was > also > > > > discussed in the last Arrow community sync meeting on 2024-04-24. > > > > > > > > For context, this was discussed[2] last year on this mailing list. We > > > > decided to revisit the discussion around the June 2024 release (Arrow > > > v17). > > > > The timing coincides with the initial release of Apache Spark 4.0.0, > > > which > > > > drops both Java 8 and 11 support. > > > > > > > > For background, we chose not to drop Java 8 support last year because > > > Arrow > > > > is seen as a low level library that should support as many > environments > > > as > > > > possible. Nowadays, we see more enthusiasm for dropping Java 8 (and > 11) > > > as > > > > exemplified by Apache Spark as well as Apache Iceberg[3]. > > > > > > > > Is it time to consider dropping Java 8? Should we drop Java 11 and > skip > > > > straight to Java 17 as our minimum version? What implications do we > need > > > to > > > > be aware of? > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Dane > > > > > > > > [1]https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/38051 > > > > [2]https://lists.apache.org/thread/s07jx58yw4mkl54t3bkggnyg0sftcrr8 > > > > [3]https://lists.apache.org/thread/ntrk2thvsg9tdccwd4flsdz9gg743368 > > > >
