On 09/18/2013 06:51 PM, Darren Shepherd wrote:
I'd be relatively opposed to switching everything to jdk7. Java 6 is the
current lowest common denominator and using java 7 at the moment will just
alienate somebody I don't know the back story. Is libvirt compiled for
jdk7? I'd be perfectly fine with compiling just the KVM driver with jdk7
as any distro that has a usable KVM implementation also has java 7.
A new version of libvirt-java was released, but the RedHat guys compiled
it with jdk 7.
I already got a patch in at libvirt-java to set the target version to
1.6:
http://www.libvirt.org/git/?p=libvirt-java.git;a=commitdiff;h=26efdef08b0d34b75fcd5930b6510dacc14f6637
I hope to get the 0.5.1 release soon which is 1.6 compatible.
So here is what I propose (which I think is what is already being proposed,
but I'm just being explicit). We keep the maven settings to keep building
1.6 byte code. Only the KVM driver do we set it to 1.7. This means that
we would then have to switch to using JDK7 for jenkins, eclipse, mvn cli,
etc. As the majority of development is done in eclipse (i think), eclipse
still sets up the projects to compile against the JRE 6 library (except KVM
will be JRE 7), so that will help prevent people from accidentally using a
JRE7 API in a 1.6 byte code format.
As far as I know both RHEL/CentOS 6 and Ubuntu 12.04 have JRE 7 in their
repos, so it's no problem on the packaging side if we target those two
platforms.
Wido
And as a totally random note, OpenJDK7 on CentOS is way faster than
OpenJDK6 on CentOS. Regardless of whatever we compile against, everybody
should try use Java 7 at runtime.
Darren
On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 9:29 AM, Alex Huang <alex.hu...@citrix.com> wrote:
I don't have much problem with switching to jdk1.7. My eclipse is running
with jdk1.7 as the builder and it can't find any problems in cs code. The
main question I think will come from the Linux variants. Are all of them
shipping with jdk1.7 now?
--Alex
-----Original Message-----
From: Trippie [mailto:trip...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Hugo Trippaers
Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2013 5:10 AM
To: dev@cloudstack.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Java 7, tomcat 7 and further upgrades
Hey all,
Sorry for the threadomancy, but the discussion have become relevant again
with the current issues with the libvirt library. Of course this could
also be
solved by updating the libvirt library with a jdk6 version. Still it
might be good
to revisit this topic.
It appears not to be possible to switch code style to 1.7 and produce a
1.6
compatible binary. I remember this working with olders versions, but
didn't
dig to much into this.
So the new question in this thread will be, should we switch CloudStack
to
jdk 1.7?
Cheers,
Hugo
On Jul 1, 2013, at 12:45 AM, Prasanna Santhanam <t...@apache.org> wrote:
On Thu, Jun 27, 2013 at 04:18:40PM -0400, John Burwell wrote:
All,
I am +1 for Java7. However, I would like to propose ridding
ourselves of Tomcat entirely and embedding a network stack such as
Netty (http://netty.io) with a servlet bridge. We have one JSP in
the system that generates JSON resources. It could be easily
eliminated with a simple servlet that generates JSON from a
ResourceBundle. Outside of this JSP. I don't see any other
requirements for a JEE container besides hosting a servlet. We would
gain a far simpler, self-contained deployment model (a single jar).
Additionally, we would gain greater control of the startup and
shutdown lifecycle, as well as, threading dynamics. If there is
interest in this approach, I have thoughts on how to achieve this
embedding and create a lightweight daemon framework that could be
used for all CloudStack daemons.
As an aside, I also think we should replace our hand-rolled NIO code
with Netty as well.
John - could you break this and other thoughts down a little more in
what's involved? Perhaps into its own thread. I don't know Netty. And
my J2EE is shaky at best.
It's been a previous wish on this list to have the packaging of
cloudstack into a single easily deployable war instead of all the
complicated packaging we do. So I'd like to hear more of that and
other issues you describe.
--
Prasanna.,
------------------------
Powered by BigRock.com
