I am in favor of bumping the minimum JDK. We could also start experimenting
with ZGC in Java 17.
For Ozone in general, we could change it to require Java 11.
@szets...@gmail.com Is there any particular reason we
want Java 11? I am leaning towards bumping it to at least Java 17.
Thanks,
Siyao
+1 for keeping java client compatible with java 8 and increasing server
side minimum java version in Ozone 2.0. As for the specific version
requirements for language, build, and runtime on the server side I'm not
sure I have a strong opinion/enough information to weigh in on specifics
right now.
E
> ... Is there any particular reason we want Java 11?
Just want to be more inclusive. Requiring a higher Java version
may exclude more applications. We could be forcing the dependent projects
such as HBase to bump their Java version. Not sure if it is true.
> So for these reasons I think makin
> Could it be that only Recon requires Java 21?
Yes, technically only Recon (its dependencies) as far as I know. But:
- I think it's easier to manage hosts with uniform Java version
- we don't know when some other dependency of OM/SCM/etc. starts
requiring newer Java
So for these reasons I thin
Does it also imply dropping Hadoop2 support?
On Mon, Nov 18, 2024 at 11:38 AM Siyao Meng wrote:
> I am in favor of bumping the minimum JDK. We could also start experimenting
> with ZGC in Java 17.
>
> For Ozone in general, we could change it to require Java 11.
>
>
> @szets...@gmail.com Is ther
