Just curious to know your requirements. Are you primarily interested
in Jakarta dependencies in the Pulsar Java client or do you have
requirements for the broker / server side libraries of Pulsar. What is
your primary motivation? Explaining that could help take your explicit
requirements into consideration. Many others might have similar
requirements.
Sure. We are using the pulsar client inside a tomcat server application.
In order to migrate to use the latest tomcat versions we now have to
move to Jakarta EE, thereby forcing us to migrate our own code but also
all dependencies to Jakarta EE. I did not yet look into what exactly
would break if our application moved to Jakarta but the pulsar client
didn't, but I'd expect things to not be pretty.
We don't really care at all about what the broker / server side
libraries do, since we don't have to integrate those with our application.
> The current target schedule is Pulsar 4.1 which is due in mid January.
From this I'm guessing that Pulsar does not follow semantic versioning?
Christian
On 06.11.24 11:45, Lari Hotari wrote:
External Message - Please be cautious when opening links or attachments
On Wed, 6 Nov 2024 at 09:35, Christian Ortlepp wrote:
Thank you for the information and sorry for the late reply, I had to
discuss this with some of my colleagues first. Currently we are still
working on migrating some other libraries to jakarta that have a higher
priority for our project, but it is possible that we will come back to
this at a later date. In that case I will reach out to you again then.
Just curious to know your requirements. Are you primarily interested
in Jakarta dependencies in the Pulsar Java client or do you have
requirements for the broker / server side libraries of Pulsar. What is
your primary motivation? Explaining that could help take your explicit
requirements into consideration. Many others might have similar
requirements.
But just to get an idea of how big of an undertaking this would be: I've
taken a look into your WIP changes and they seem like quite a lot. On a
spectrum from "just started" to "almost done", how far along are your
changes (if you can make such an estimation)?
There are a lot of changes due to the major changes in Jetty 12
compared to Jetty 9. In the WIP changes, there are missing changes for
Web socket support which is more work to migrate.
The amount of changes aren't the main challenge. As described in
https://lists.apache.org/thread/mkxw56bt8jdf5b1zq1gdwvy50xgrdj30 , the
blocker currently is that in the current setup, Jetty 9 would have to
be upgraded to Jetty 12 also in BookKeeper libraries. Since BookKeeper
is currently at Java 8 level, that would first have to be bumped to
Java 17 to support Jetty 12.
The current target schedule is Pulsar 4.1 which is due in mid January.
-Lari
