I suppose given the short lifetime of each Java release you could argue we're always close to EOL. I feel like we shouldn't ship with a version that is currently EOL.
Coming up with a policy for all upcoming releases may also be incredibly difficult. 6 months java releases could pan out like Tick Tock and reveal itself to be a fun idea with some really bad consequences, and it goes away after Java 12. Impossible to tell. How about we figure out the next release and get a little experience under our belts with their new release schedule before we try to make long term decisions? On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 9:08 AM Josh McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org> wrote: > > At this point I feel like we should already be > > targeting Java 10 at a minimum. > Barring some surprises from other people supporting 10 longer-term, > wouldn't that be coupling C*'s 4.0 release with a runtime that's > likely EOL shortly after? > > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 11:52 AM, Jonathan Haddad <j...@jonhaddad.com> > wrote: > > Java 8 was marked as EOL in the middle of last year, I hope we wouldn't > > require it for Cassandra 4. At this point I feel like we should already > be > > targeting Java 10 at a minimum. > > > > Personally I'd prefer not to tie our releases to any vendor / product / > > package's release schedule. > > > > > > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 6:49 AM Jason Brown <jasedbr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> I'm coming to be on-board with #3. > >> > >> One thing to watch out for (we can't account for it now) is how our > >> dependencies choose to move forward. If we need to upgrade a jar (netty, > >> for example) due to some leak or vulnerability, and it only runs on a > >> higher version, we may be forced to upgrade the base java version. > Like, I > >> said we can't possibly foresee these things, and we'll just have to > make a > >> hard decision if the situation arises, but just something to keep in > mind. > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 5:39 AM, Josh McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > > > >> > > 3) Release 4.0 for Java 8, *optionally* branch 4.1 for Java 11 later > >> > > >> > This seems like the best of our bad options, with the addition of > >> > "optionally". > >> > > >> > > >> > On Fri, Mar 23, 2018 at 8:12 AM, Gerald Henriksen <ghenr...@gmail.com > > > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > On Fri, 23 Mar 2018 04:54:23 +0000, you wrote: > >> > > > >> > > >I think Michael is right. It would be impossible to make everyone > >> follow > >> > > >such a fast release scheme, and supporting it will be pressured > onto > >> the > >> > > >various distributions, M$ and Apple. > >> > > >On the other hand https://adoptopenjdk.net has already done a lot > of > >> > the > >> > > >work and it's already rumoured they may take up backporting of > >> > > security/bug > >> > > >fixes. I'd fully expect a lot of users to collaborate around this > (or > >> > > >similar), and there's no reason we couldn't do our part to > contribute. > >> > > > >> > > A posting on Reddit yesterday from someone from adoptopenjdk claimes > >> > > that they will be doing LTS releases starting with Java 11, and > there > >> > > should be updates to their website to reflect that soon: > >> > > > >> > > > https://www.reddit.com/r/java/comments/86ce66/java_long_term_support/ > >> > > > >> > > So I guess a wait and see to what they commit could be worthwhile. > >> > > > >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org > >
