Re: [DISCUSS] Upgrade to Java 8

[larry mccay <lm...@apache.org>]

Personally, I believe that it is too early to require Java 8 given the
current state of the ecosystem.
We should definitely make it a JIRA to track across the next few releases
in order to reevaluate the requirements of other projects - most notably
Hadoop itself.

I will file a JIRA that we can set for 0.10.0 and reevaluate at close down
of the release and likely move out to 0.11.0.

On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Sumit Gupta <su...@hortonworks.com>
wrote:

> I found this for the umbrella task
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP-11090
>
> It looks like most of the subtasks are done but the dependencies still
> need to be ironed out.
>
>
>
> On 7/27/16, 9:32 AM, "larry mccay" <lm...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> >I am generally in favor of this for obvious reasons like EOL of Java 7.
> >We do have to do some investigation of whether dropping support for Java 7
> >will align well with the rest of the Hadoop ecosystem.
> >This is important for various distributions that include Apache Knox.
> >
> >On Wed, Jul 27, 2016 at 8:51 AM, Sumit Gupta <sumit.gupta@hortonworks.com
> >
> >wrote:
> >
> >> +1 to going to Java 8.
> >>
> >> There was some work done earlier to make sure that the code compiles and
> >> tests pass with Java 8 so hopefully all we need to do is change the
> >>build.
> >> But regardless of the work needed, it is something we should slate for
> >>the
> >> next Knox release (probably 0.10.0 or 1.0.0 whatever it might be).
> >>
> >> Thanks for bringing this discussion up.
> >>
> >> Sumit.
> >>
> >>
> >> On 7/27/16, 5:13 AM, "Jérôme LELEU" <le...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Hi,
> >> >
> >> >This is a pre-requisite to upgrade to pac4j v1.9 (and j2e-pac4j v1.3),
> >>but
> >> >I think it's a more general concern for the project.
> >> >
> >> >Java 7 was EOL in April 2015, my feeling is that we should upgrade to
> >>Java
> >> >8.
> >> >
> >> >I rebuild the whole source code using Java 8 without any problem (I did
> >> >not
> >> >run the tests though).
> >> >
> >> >What do you think?
> >> >
> >> >Thanks.
> >> >Best regards,
> >> >Jérôme
> >>
> >>
>
>