Hi all, Thank you for your suggestion! Close this discussion now.
Thanks, Zixuan Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> 于2023年2月16日周四 18:19写道： > -1 > We should still stick to JDK8 for a while on the client side (and > shared modules). > > I see that slowly the ecosystem is moving di JDK11, but it is not yet our > time. > This year is Pulsar momentum, please do not add blockers to the adoption > > > > > Enrico > > Il giorno gio 16 feb 2023 alle ore 09:39 Horizon > <1060026...@qq.com.invalid> ha scritto: > > > > -1. We could know the user dependency. Maybe the user dependent the > third lib is not compatible with 11 or 17. It will introduce some problem > for user. And the user need to pay more effort to test the project > compatibility after upgrade the client. > > > > > > >> Hi all, > > >> > > >> We are using JDK 17 to compile all the components. For the main > component, > > >> the broker and proxy require JDK 17, and the client requires JDK 8. > > >> > > >> In Pulsar 3.x, we should keep up with modern JDKS for all components, > and > > >> over time, I believe many users have adopted JDK 11/17, which provides > > >> significant performance and security improvements, see > > >> > https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/java/openjdk/reasons-to-move-to-java-11 > > >> > > >> Switching to JDK17 is a bit radical, and we still need to consider > this. > > >> > > >> Thanks, > > >> Zixuan > > >
