Thanks, I think it is good to see and observe how people will react to the Java 8 support removal.
On Fri, Aug 23, 2024 at 6:39 AM Dane Pitkin <dpit...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi Laurent, > > These are good ideas worth evaluating. I am also on board with waiting for > user feedback after the Java 8 deprecation is released. It is important to > strike the right balance between supporting the broader community and > allowing developers to improve the project with newer technologies to stay > relevant. The quick push to Java 17 mainly originates from the general > consensus among other related Java projects (e.g. Spark, Iceberg, Avro) > that have discussed migrating directly from Java 8 to Java 17. Perhaps we > revisit this discussion in 3-6 months to see how the Java ecosystem has > taken to these changes? > > Thanks, > Dane > > On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 6:31 PM Laurent Goujon <laur...@dremio.com.invalid > > > wrote: > > > There's another path which is to have arrow core still targeting Java 11 > > but having the arrow orc module targeting Java 17 for example. Or like I > > also mentioned in the other thread, leverage MRJAR capability to offer > > support for recent java APIs while maintaining compatibility for those > > users who cannot migrate out of Java 11 yet. I even contributed some of > the > > work to support it but we postponed it due to the lack of immediate use > for > > it (if I interpret correctly the feedback I received). > > > > I guess I'm a bit surprised by this push to drop support for older java > > versions which are still supported and used (even if less and less) while > > we also trying very hard to not ditch support for RHEL7/CentOS 7 for > > example, something i discovered when we realized that grpc proto plugin > was > > not compatible with this OS anymore (discussed at > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/43264, and mentioned in > > https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/40735, but at the same time we > > upgraded grpc in https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/43657?). In > > comparison, even if it's kind of true that Java 8, 11 and soon 17 may not > > see new features, they are still receiving fixes and security updates > from > > multiple vendors, including Adoptium which are planning new releases for > > Java 8 and 11 in october (and availability until 2026 for java 8 and 2027 > > for java 11). > > I don't want to tune down the desire of try and adopt latest technology, > > but I'm kindly asking for the whole community to be considered and to > > discuss possible alternatives to achieve the same goals? > > > > Laurent > > > > On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 9:43 AM Dane Pitkin <dpit...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > I realized I'm repeating myself a bit here with my reasoning, my > > apologies. > > > I'll emphasize that the dependencies are the strongest factor, in that > > over > > > time we have to pin more and more dependencies to older versions. I > think > > > code/stack modernization would be nice and the biggest feature I'm > > looking > > > forward to is Arrow integration with the new FFM APIs in Java 22. > > However, > > > modernization hasn't been the biggest priority yet mainly due to > > > contributor capacity. I imagine if we start filing GitHub issues with > > > improvement ideas, contributors might start picking them up over time. > > > > > > On Wed, Aug 21, 2024 at 12:01 PM Dane Pitkin <dpit...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > > > > Hi Laurent, > > > > > > > > Kudos again for doing the migration from Java 8 -> 11 in Arrow. That > > was > > > a > > > > large contribution, thank you! > > > > > > > > I see a few reasons to drop Java 11: > > > > - Java 11 official support ended September 2023, but it will receive > > > > extended support until 2032. > > > > - Dependencies are upgrading at a faster pace. For example, ORC v2.0 > > > > supports Java 17+. > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > Dane > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 16, 2024 at 11:51 AM Laurent Goujon > > > <laur...@dremio.com.invalid> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I think like last time we should see where the community is as a > whole > > > on > > > >> JDK version support? Just looking at Spark may not be enough to get > a > > > >> sense > > > >> that it is okay to drop Java 11. Overall I think we should at least > > > give 2 > > > >> major versions before removing support. > > > >> > > > >> When I did the migration from Java 8 to Java 11, most of the updates > > > were > > > >> on the toolchain but I haven't seen a lot of code changes which > would > > > not > > > >> compile with Java 8. And so I'm not sure what we expect from Java 17 > > in > > > >> terms of code changes and or stack/modernization. @Dane, could you > > > >> elaborate maybe? > > > >> > > > >> Cheers, > > > >> > > > >> Laurent > > > >> > > > >> On Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 5:30 PM Vibhatha Abeykoon < > vibha...@gmail.com> > > > >> wrote: > > > >> > > > >> > Thanks Dane for once again pushing the topic on Java language > > support. > > > >> > In terms of project maintenance and long term growth, I am happy > > with > > > >> this > > > >> > change. > > > >> > > > > >> > Regarding the usage of `--add-opens`, it would still be okay, > given > > > the > > > >> > fact that we provided that option either way. > > > >> > But in future, I think we should figure out a way to do this > better. > > > >> > > > > >> > Although as you suggested, it would be best to gather feedback > from > > > the > > > >> > community, > > > >> > specifically that we have already done a minimum version upgrade > > very > > > >> > recently. > > > >> > Also, it would be better to do this around v20 or v21 if we agree > to > > > >> move > > > >> > forward. The reason > > > >> > is it would at least give enough time for some users to get ready > > for > > > a > > > >> > change. Again this may require > > > >> > consensus in the community. Also we can take another consensus > from > > > the > > > >> > github dependabot PRs, > > > >> > it provides a hint on how much technical burden and > vulnerabilities > > we > > > >> have > > > >> > to keep up when we don't > > > >> > upgrade the minimal supported Java version. I think we had a good > > > >> > experience in gathering those details for Java 8 [1] (citing once > > > more). > > > >> > > > > >> > +1 for this proposed change. > > > >> > > > > >> > [1] https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/38051 > > > >> > > > > >> > On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 2:17 AM Jacob Wujciak < > assignu...@apache.org > > > > > > >> > wrote: > > > >> > > > > >> > > Thanks Dane for starting the discussion! > > > >> > > I would be +1 but I am neither a Java user nor familiar with the > > > space > > > >> > but > > > >> > > seeing spark go 17+ is encouraging. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Also worth mentioning is that people that can't drop 11 can > always > > > >> > continue > > > >> > > using the versions that still support it. > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Best > > > >> > > Jacob > > > >> > > > > > >> > > Am Mi., 31. Juli 2024 um 19:00 Uhr schrieb Dane Pitkin < > > > >> > dpit...@apache.org > > > >> > > >: > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Hi all, > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > I'd like to bring up for discussion dropping Java 11 and > > > supporting > > > >> > Java > > > >> > > 17 > > > >> > > > as the minimum version[1]. Earlier this year we agreed to drop > > > Java > > > >> 8 > > > >> > and > > > >> > > > support Java 11 as the min version[2]. That has now been > > completed > > > >> and > > > >> > > will > > > >> > > > be released in Arrow v18 [3]. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > My suggestion would be to drop Java 11 in Arrow v19 (~Jan > 2025). > > > If > > > >> we > > > >> > > want > > > >> > > > to wait for feedback from users after we release removal of > Java > > > 8, > > > >> > then > > > >> > > > perhaps Arrow v20 (~Apr 2025). > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > Some reasonings: > > > >> > > > - Java 11 is now in Extended Support for the remainder of its > > > >> lifecycle > > > >> > > > - Apache Spark only supports Java 17+ in v4.X > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > Some drawbacks: > > > >> > > > - Users will be required to add java command line arguments > > > >> > > > (--add-opens)[4]. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > Overall, this could be a big step towards modernizing the > Arrow > > > Java > > > >> > > > project. > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > Thanks, > > > >> > > > Dane > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > [1]https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/43307 > > > >> > > > [2] > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/65vqpmrrtpshxo53572zcv91j1lb2y8g > > > >> > > > [3]https://github.com/apache/arrow/issues/38051 > > > >> > > > [4]https://arrow.apache.org/docs/java/install.html#id3 > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
