Here at Netflix, we have been running Samza on 1.8 since last year and have
been in production with it. So move to 1.8 is a welcome. No concerns there
for us.

Thanks
Monal

On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Jacob Maes <jacob.m...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Thanks everyone. Sounds like a few want to move forward with Java 1.8
> source compatibility. I still think it would be useful to hear from a Java
> 1.7 shop.
>
> Hey Maurice, as I recall you were running Samza on Java 1.7. Is that still
> the case? Do you have a roadmap to move to 1.8? Do you typically keep your
> Samza instance(s) synced with master?
>
> Thanks,
> Jake
>
> On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Navina Ramesh <
> nram...@linkedin.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> > +1 for moving to JDK8.
> >
> > We have traditionally been pretty slow at releasing. I think we need to
> > start thinking in terms of long-term release plans and iterate faster.
> >
> > Prior to Samza 1.0, I think we will at least have 2 releases:
> > 0.10.1 -> featuring mostly bug-fixes and improvements to host-affinity
> > 0.11.0 -> incorporating experimental features - asynRunLoop
> (multithreading
> > and Standalone Samza
> > 1.0.0 -> stabilized features - AsyncRunLoop and Standalone + experimental
> > SQL operator layer
> >
> > The above release plan is simply what I had in mind. Nothing is concrete!
> > :)
> >
> > Obviously, we shouldn't remove jdk7 support in 0.10.1. Perhaps, 0.11.0.
> > will be a good starting point? Or should we wait until we are at 1.0.
> >
> > I think the users in the community need to provide feedback so we can
> make
> > progress accordingly.
> >
> > Thanks!
> > Navina
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Roger Hoover <roger.hoo...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > +1 for me.  We're already using Java 8 in PRD.
> > >
> > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 10:45 AM, Yi Pan <nickpa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I am +1 on the JDK8 move. As Jake has elaborated, there are numerous
> > > > advantages from 1.8 source compatible code.
> > > >
> > > > As for the downside of dropping JDK7 support, obviously, bin
> > > > backward-compatibility will be broken. However, moving to JDK8 binary
> > is
> > > > not a big effort for JDK7-compatible Java and Scala source code, in
> > term
> > > of
> > > > compiling and packaging. There is no need for source code change and
> we
> > > > have been building JDK8 binary in LinkedIn and running in production
> w/
> > > > JDK8 for a long time w/o seeing any issues.
> > > >
> > > > For users cannot upgrade their runtime JVM version to JDK8 easily,
> the
> > > > latest coming release will still be on JDK7. Question is: how long
> > should
> > > > we hold back in waiting for this upgrade?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks!
> > > >
> > > > -Yi
> > > >
> > > > On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 6:27 PM, Jacob Maes <jacob.m...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hey everyone,
> > > > >
> > > > > I wanted to start a discussion to see what folks think about moving
> > to
> > > > Java
> > > > > 1.8 source compatibility at some point after the 10.1 release.
> > > > >
> > > > > Java 8 has a number of nice features that can help us build more
> > > concise,
> > > > > maintainable, and robust software. A few notable features that
> would
> > > > > benefit Samza:
> > > > > 1. Stream API - provide a compact syntax for expressing
> > transformations
> > > > on
> > > > > collections. These may be foundational for future API work
> including
> > > > > Operators (SAMZA-914)
> > > > > 2. Default Methods - enable us to evolve interfaces without
> breaking
> > > > > compatibility
> > > > > 3. Concurrent package enhancements - generally make concurrent
> > > > programming
> > > > > easier, which will be more important with features like
> > multithreading
> > > > > support (SAMZA-863)
> > > > > 4. Lambdas - love them or hate them, they do reduce the amount of
> > > > > boilerplate code, especially when used in place of anonymous
> classes.
> > > > >
> > > > > It certainly would be nice to leverage some of the features above.
> > > > However,
> > > > > we have historically supported Java versions N and N-1 and it
> doesn't
> > > > look
> > > > > like Java 9 is coming until next year. So, discontinuing support
> for
> > > Java
> > > > > 1.7 at this point would be a departure from our normal support
> matrix
> > > > for a
> > > > > significant period of time. Thoughts on the pros and cons?
> > > > >
> > > > > I know some folks in this community are still on Java 1.7. How many
> > of
> > > > you
> > > > > stay up to date with the latest Samza? Do you have a roadmap to
> move
> > to
> > > > > Java 1.8?
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > Jake
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Navina R.
> >
>

Reply via email to