I think that defaulting to Java 21 runtime for CI and Docker images makes a lot
of sense.
However, Java 17 compatibility at the bytecode level (compiling with
release=17) could be useful for corporate environments where they have a strict
policy of using only specific Java version runtimes. Typi
I totally agree with Lari.
We are not going to break compatibility with old clients in any case.
If users want new client features, they will be forced to upgrade the
jdk version, it's nothing new in software.
I suggest we migrate to Jetty, change the minimum runtime version to
21 and release 4.18
Comparing Pulsar to BookKeeper doesn't make sense. Pulsar clients are broadly
deployed, which isn't the case for BookKeeper clients.
If someone needs JDK 8 support for BookKeeper, they could continue to use a
maintenance branch version of BookKeeper. The master branch of BookKeeper
should move
I think we should start with refactoring the BK client into a separate
module built with JDK 8 and then move BK to JDK 17.
FWIW this is similar to the Pulsar's JDK support for client/server parts.
On Mon, Jun 24, 2024 at 4:22 AM Lari Hotari wrote:
> For Pulsar 4.0 (scheduled for October), we nee
I made PR https://github.com/apache/bookkeeper/pull/4446 to upgrade minimum
required version to Java 17.
-Lari
On 2024/05/27 01:17:14 ZhangJian He wrote:
> Hi, BookKeepers, I want to propose and clarify a new CI strategy based on
> our former practices.
>
> ## Current CI Jobs
>
> - **PR Valida
For Pulsar 4.0 (scheduled for October), we need to migrate from Jetty 9 to
Jetty 12 since Jetty 9 is not supported any more ([1]). This also impacts
Bookkeeper since Pulsar bundles all dependencies in a single directory and this
doesn't allow library conflicts between Pulsar and Bookkeeper. This
In general, dropping older JDKs and updating the CI makes sense for the
BookKeeper server.
Here comes the problem that we want to maintain the BK client with lower
JDK compatibility, even if it is EOL.
Companies still use older JDKs, pay to 3rd party vendors to maintain the
JDKs/provide the securit
ping
Thanks
ZhangJian He
Twitter: shoothzj
Wechat: shoothzj
On Mon, May 27, 2024 at 9:17 AM ZhangJian He wrote:
> Hi, BookKeepers, I want to propose and clarify a new CI strategy based on
> our former practices.
>
> ## Current CI Jobs
>
> - **PR Validation Tests**: Currently, these jobs run on
