Fair enough. Was just a thought for a not often used deprecated feature if it
was a blocker.
On Thu, Mar 24, 2022, at 4:33 PM, Ekaterina Dimitrova wrote:
> Me too… support a feature only with certain jdk sounds also confusing to me
> personally
>
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 at 12:54, Brandon Williams
Me too… support a feature only with certain jdk sounds also confusing to me
personally
On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 at 12:54, Brandon Williams wrote:
> I don't think it would be worth the effort or a good idea to do so either.
>
I don't think it would be worth the effort or a good idea to do so either.
“ exclude on JDK17, include on 11”
At this point we do not support that setup, yes
On Thu, 24 Mar 2022 at 12:43, Josh McKenzie wrote:
> if we go for Java 17 this means we bump to 5.0 instead of 4.1 at least
> because we will remove the already deprecated scripted UDFs and this is
> breaking cha
> if we go for Java 17 this means we bump to 5.0 instead of 4.1 at least
> because we will remove the already deprecated scripted UDFs and this is
> breaking change.
Ah. I assumed optionality on build (exclude on JDK17, include on 11). If that's
not possible then yeah, 5.0 would make more sense.
Thank you Josh, I definitely share the excitement but I also want to bring
a few more things.
" Having a new section in the build.xml for JDK17 runtime env w/more
--add-exports and --add-opens is consistent with how we got jdk11 support
working (and run it to this day looks like). It's worth consi
My .02 (Ekaterina and I have been chatting on slack about this a bit):
Having a new section in the build.xml for JDK17 runtime env w/more
--add-exports and --add-opens is consistent with how we got jdk11 support
working (and run it to this day looks like). It's worth considering if we want
to m
Thank you for your quick response Scott.
I agree on all points you made. Also, with our current setup the
dependencies updates would affect the stable Java 11. We cannot afford to
not consider potential changes in behavior, performance, etc
But also we should work on potential blockers and not lea
Ekaterina, thank you very much for sharing this!
I admit, it’s much more involved than I expected to be.
The —add-opens and —add-exports flags seem suitable for development and perhaps
experimental support, but we’ll probably want to make changes to remove as many
as we can before considering J
Hi everyone,
Looking into our way to Java 17, I wanted to share with the community
findings/thoughts and align on course of action.
We already deprecated scripted UDFs so we can remove them when the time to
switch from Java8&11 to Java 11&17 comes. I removed the ant script tasks
and created custo
10 matches
Mail list logo
