You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@asterixdb.apache.org by Ian Maxon <im...@apache.org> on 2025/01/06 21:19:46 UTC
[DISCUSS] Move to Java 21 and JVM versions going forward
Hi Everyone,
At the moment, on branches that are ancestors of trinity and newer, we're
on Java 17. Now that 21 has been out for a while, it seems like a good idea
to upgrade to get all the latest goodies. What does everyone think? The
build seems to work fine on 21 without any modification.
Furthermore, I would like to propose something going forward, that we
should adopt the latest LTS Java version within 6 months of it coming out
going forward. This way we can be sure we do not end up getting stuck on an
unsupported version out of inertia.
Looking forward to hearing everyone's thoughts.
-Ian
Re: [DISCUSS] Move to Java 21 and JVM versions going forward
Posted by Murtadha Hubail <hu...@gmail.com>.
+1 to moving to Java 21. Maybe we can be a bit more flexible on adapting the latest LTS to be within a year, but I like the proposal in general.
-Murtadha
________________________________
From: Ian Maxon <im...@apache.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 7, 2025 12:19:46 AM
To: dev@asterixdb.apache.org <de...@asterixdb.apache.org>
Subject: [DISCUSS] Move to Java 21 and JVM versions going forward
Hi Everyone,
At the moment, on branches that are ancestors of trinity and newer, we're
on Java 17. Now that 21 has been out for a while, it seems like a good idea
to upgrade to get all the latest goodies. What does everyone think? The
build seems to work fine on 21 without any modification.
Furthermore, I would like to propose something going forward, that we
should adopt the latest LTS Java version within 6 months of it coming out
going forward. This way we can be sure we do not end up getting stuck on an
unsupported version out of inertia.
Looking forward to hearing everyone's thoughts.
-Ian
Re: [DISCUSS] Move to Java 21 and JVM versions going forward
Posted by Till Westmann <ti...@apache.org>.
+1
On 2025/01/07 22:56:01 Taewoo Kim wrote:
> +1 to upgrade to 21 and to set a time frame for future upgrades with LTS
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2025 at 11:24 AM Suryaa Charan Shivakumar
> <ss...@ucr.edu.invalid> wrote:
>
> > +1 for the Java 21 upgrade and periodic updates to the latest java version
> > in the future.
> >
> > - Suryaa
> >
> > On Tue, Jan 7, 2025 at 11:15 AM Mike Carey <dt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > +1 to upgrade to 21 and to set a time window for future upgrades
> > >
> > > On 1/6/25 1:19 PM, Ian Maxon wrote:
> > > > Hi Everyone,
> > > > At the moment, on branches that are ancestors of trinity and newer,
> > we're
> > > > on Java 17. Now that 21 has been out for a while, it seems like a good
> > > idea
> > > > to upgrade to get all the latest goodies. What does everyone think? The
> > > > build seems to work fine on 21 without any modification.
> > > >
> > > > Furthermore, I would like to propose something going forward, that we
> > > > should adopt the latest LTS Java version within 6 months of it coming
> > out
> > > > going forward. This way we can be sure we do not end up getting stuck
> > on
> > > an
> > > > unsupported version out of inertia.
> > > >
> > > > Looking forward to hearing everyone's thoughts.
> > > > -Ian
> > > >
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Move to Java 21 and JVM versions going forward
Posted by Taewoo Kim <wa...@gmail.com>.
+1 to upgrade to 21 and to set a time frame for future upgrades with LTS
On Tue, Jan 7, 2025 at 11:24 AM Suryaa Charan Shivakumar
<ss...@ucr.edu.invalid> wrote:
> +1 for the Java 21 upgrade and periodic updates to the latest java version
> in the future.
>
> - Suryaa
>
> On Tue, Jan 7, 2025 at 11:15 AM Mike Carey <dt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > +1 to upgrade to 21 and to set a time window for future upgrades
> >
> > On 1/6/25 1:19 PM, Ian Maxon wrote:
> > > Hi Everyone,
> > > At the moment, on branches that are ancestors of trinity and newer,
> we're
> > > on Java 17. Now that 21 has been out for a while, it seems like a good
> > idea
> > > to upgrade to get all the latest goodies. What does everyone think? The
> > > build seems to work fine on 21 without any modification.
> > >
> > > Furthermore, I would like to propose something going forward, that we
> > > should adopt the latest LTS Java version within 6 months of it coming
> out
> > > going forward. This way we can be sure we do not end up getting stuck
> on
> > an
> > > unsupported version out of inertia.
> > >
> > > Looking forward to hearing everyone's thoughts.
> > > -Ian
> > >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Move to Java 21 and JVM versions going forward
Posted by Suryaa Charan Shivakumar <ss...@ucr.edu.INVALID>.
+1 for the Java 21 upgrade and periodic updates to the latest java version
in the future.
- Suryaa
On Tue, Jan 7, 2025 at 11:15 AM Mike Carey <dt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> +1 to upgrade to 21 and to set a time window for future upgrades
>
> On 1/6/25 1:19 PM, Ian Maxon wrote:
> > Hi Everyone,
> > At the moment, on branches that are ancestors of trinity and newer, we're
> > on Java 17. Now that 21 has been out for a while, it seems like a good
> idea
> > to upgrade to get all the latest goodies. What does everyone think? The
> > build seems to work fine on 21 without any modification.
> >
> > Furthermore, I would like to propose something going forward, that we
> > should adopt the latest LTS Java version within 6 months of it coming out
> > going forward. This way we can be sure we do not end up getting stuck on
> an
> > unsupported version out of inertia.
> >
> > Looking forward to hearing everyone's thoughts.
> > -Ian
> >
Re: [DISCUSS] Move to Java 21 and JVM versions going forward
Posted by Mike Carey <dt...@gmail.com>.
+1 to upgrade to 21 and to set a time window for future upgrades
On 1/6/25 1:19 PM, Ian Maxon wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
> At the moment, on branches that are ancestors of trinity and newer, we're
> on Java 17. Now that 21 has been out for a while, it seems like a good idea
> to upgrade to get all the latest goodies. What does everyone think? The
> build seems to work fine on 21 without any modification.
>
> Furthermore, I would like to propose something going forward, that we
> should adopt the latest LTS Java version within 6 months of it coming out
> going forward. This way we can be sure we do not end up getting stuck on an
> unsupported version out of inertia.
>
> Looking forward to hearing everyone's thoughts.
> -Ian
>