Good thread. I'd say when a NiFi 2 line happens Java 8 would be gone completely and we would/should consider only supporting the latest LTS line perhaps.
On Fri, Mar 26, 2021 at 8:05 AM Kevin Doran <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi JL, > > It’s worth discussing/considering changes such as this periodically, so > thanks for bringing it up. > > Personally, I would be hesitant to make such a large change. While it would > likely be a net-positive for the NiFi image itself, I think it would impact a > number of community members that have Dockerfile’s that use our image as a > starting point. > > A GitHub code search [1] seems to confirm this, showing >100 Dockerfiles that > contain “FROM apache/nifi*” > > For NiFi 1.x, I think the best we could do is leverage tagging to offer image > variants that differ in layers we build upon, for example OS or JDK/JRE > variants. This seems to be a popular method, for example, Apache Tomcat > offers a multiple of combinations of version, JDK, and OS [2]. > > So if it would be beneficial, we could add official images for other jdk > versions indicated by tags, for example apache/nifi:1.13.2, > apache/nifi:1.13.2-jre11, etc. > > I believe this was part of the plan for the (empty) apache/nifi-container > code repository [3]. I think the intention was always to build out a richer > set of diverse container images based on files in this repository, which > could be maintained/released decoupled from the NiFi source code itself. With > so many in the community running containerized NiFi, perhaps it's worth > reviving that discussion to see what, if anything, would be most valuable to > add to our container offerings. > > For NiFi 2 we can and should definitely consider what changes we want to make > to our “default” base image, including which JRE. > > [1] > https://github.com/search?l=&q=%22FROM+apache%2Fnifi%22+language%3ADockerfile&type=code > > <https://github.com/search?l=&q=%22FROM+apache/nifi%22+language:Dockerfile&type=code> > [2] https://hub.docker.com/_/tomcat?tab=description > <https://hub.docker.com/_/tomcat?tab=description> > [3] https://github.com/apache/nifi-container > <https://github.com/apache/nifi-container> > > Thanks! > Kevin > > > On Mar 26, 2021, at 07:49, José Luis Pedrosa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > Hi All > > > > I see that the docker images generated are based "openjdk:8-jre" should we > > (I volunteer) to update them to "11-jre"? as both versions are supported (8 > > and 11) I don't see any reason why not, and will be more future proof. > > > > Any opinions? > > > > JL > > > > > > > > On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 1:59 PM Joe Witt <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Mark > >> > >> That we can do with a NiFi 2 release for sure. Before then it isnt great. > >> > >> Oracles JVM is not what I see mostly in the wild any longer and we do see a > >> ton of Java 8 usage still. > >> > >> We can and should drop Java 8 but itll be important to do it when we cut a > >> lot of crud out as well. > >> > >> Thanks > >> > >> On Thu, Mar 18, 2021 at 6:03 AM Mark Bean <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> I'd like to discuss migrating to Java 11 as the minimum required Java > >>> version for NiFi. We've been supporting both Java 8 and Java 11 for some > >>> time now. There is increased overhead in verifying builds with two > >>> different versions. There are some features and syntax available in Java > >> 11 > >>> which cannot be used in order for NiFi to remain compatible with both > >>> versions. Java 8 premier support (Oracle) runs out in one year. Java 17 - > >>> the next LTS version - is due out later this year. > >>> > >>> There should be plenty of lead time for users to prepare for the > >>> transition. So I wanted to start the discussion well in advance of when > >> we > >>> discontinue Java 8 support. And, logistically how do we best inform the > >>> community of upcoming changes like this? > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Mark > >>> > >> >
