Dear all, It seems the main question is whether we should consider version 3.9 as an LTS release. For example, will we continue with versions like 3.9.1, 3.9.2, ... 3.9.100?
If yes, we should backport both KIP-1006 and support for future JDKs. If not, backporting KIP-1006 to 3.9 would be sufficient to fix the issue of running version 3.9 under JDK 23, even if JDK 23 is still not officially supported by 3.9. Best, Chia-Ping Greg Harris <greg.har...@aiven.io.invalid> 於 2024年11月21日 週四 上午4:37寫道： > > Has the SecurityManager been fully removed in JDK 23? > > What is the effect of running Kafka 3.9.0 with JDK 23? > > The SecurityManager has been degraded, so by default our users experience > an UnsupportedOperationException. They can work-around this by setting a > system property. > In JRE 24, JEP-486 [1] has removed this workaround, so an unpatched 3.9.x > will experience an UnsupportedOperationException unconditionally. > > > I see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-17638 > > which explicitly adds JDK 23 to our CI with a fix version of 4.0.0. Lack > of > > support for JDK 23 in 3.9.x is not a bug, it is what we planned (as far > as > > I can tell). > > Originally we were planning to get this change into 3.9.0, but we missed > the merge deadline. I opened that ticket afterwards to be fixed in 4.0.0 > because that's the next release. > The patch was always intended to be backportable, and I intended to > backport it [2]. > > I understand that if we consider Java 23 support to be a feature (which is > the standing decision), this is a pretty obvious case of missing feature > freeze, and the current course of action (releasing in 4.0.0) is how we > would handle it. > I'm asking for this to be reconsidered as a bug fix, because it allows us > to backport the change, which is what our users are asking for [3]. > > Thanks, > Greg > > [1] https://openjdk.org/jeps/486 > [2] https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/16522#issuecomment-2377340024 > [3] https://lists.apache.org/thread/312lm617q05k87kxsrwlqhk8rfg29t7g > > On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 11:50 AM David Arthur <mum...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Greg, > > > > I have not been following this closely, so apologies for some basic > > questions. > > > > Has the SecurityManager been fully removed in JDK 23? > > > > What is the effect of running Kafka 3.9.0 with JDK 23? > > > > By "4.0 breaking changes" do you mean changes to our JDK/Scala supported > > versions, removal or ZK, Kafka API changes, or something else? > > > > In general, I do not think we should change our supported JDK versions > in a > > hotfix release. I see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-17638 > > which explicitly adds JDK 23 to our CI with a fix version of 4.0.0. Lack > of > > support for JDK 23 in 3.9.x is not a bug, it is what we planned (as far > as > > I can tell). > > > > Also, I feel that we should not add too much to 3.9.x aside from actual > > bugs. If we backport things into 3.9.x, it will slow adoption of 4.x and > > increase our maintenance burden over time. > > > > Just my $0.02 > > > > Thanks! > > David A > > > > On Wed, Nov 20, 2024 at 12:22 PM Greg Harris > <greg.har...@aiven.io.invalid > > > > > wrote: > > > > > Hi all, > > > > > > Now that 3.9.0 is released and 4.0.x is progressing, I'd like to > > understand > > > everyone's expectations about the 3.9.x branch, and ask for a specific > > > consensus on Java 23 support. > > > > > > Some context that I think is relevant to the discussion: > > > * KIP-1006 [1] proposes a backwards-compatible strategy for handling > the > > > ongoing removal of the SecurityManager, which is merged and due to > > release > > > in 4.0.0 [2]. > > > * KIP-1012 [3] rejected ongoing parallel feature development on a 3.x > > > branch while having trunk on 4.x. > > > * During the 3.9.0 release, the patch [2] was rejected [4] due to > being a > > > new feature which did not meet the feature freeze deadline. > > > * Other than the SecurityManager removal, there are additional PRs > which > > > would also need to be backported for full Java 23 support [5] > including a > > > Scala patch upgrade. > > > * Downstream users are asking for a backport [6] because adding support > > for > > > Java 23 would obligate them to also include the 4.0 breaking changes. > > > > > > So while adding Java version support in the past has been a KIP-less > > > feature and normally only appears in the next version, it happens to > > align > > > with a major version bump this time. This will cause additional pain > for > > > users if we do not elect to backport this. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Greg > > > > > > [1] > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-1006%3A+Remove+SecurityManager+Support > > > [2] https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/16522 > > > [3] > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-1012%3A+The+need+for+a+Kafka+3.8+and+3.9+release > > > [4] https://lists.apache.org/thread/xy5rwd1w274qgpwf3qxxnzlqpoly5d4p > > > [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-17638 > > > [6] https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/16522#issuecomment-2488340682 > > > > > > > > > -- > > David Arthur > > >
