Apache Builds & JDK

[Jonathan Hurley <jh...@hortonworks.com>]

Hi All,

I introduced a failure on builds.apache.org today; the odd thing was that the failing test ran perfectly fine on my local environment and on other developer’s environments. It was a failure in a mock library and I determined it was caused by a JDK version difference. I use JDK 1.6 and builds.apache.org uses JDK 1.7

This raises an important question: If Ambari supports JDK 1.6, we should be building with JDK 1.6 in order to catch compilation issues? I could easily introduce a JDK 1.7 method or class and builds.apache.org won’t catch it.

I’m going to work on fixing my unit test now that I can see it failing after switching to JDK 1.7, but I think we need to change builds.apache.org to JDK 1.6.

Community thoughts?
-- 
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to 
which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, 
privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader 
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that 
any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or 
forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately 
and delete it from your system. Thank You.

Re: Apache Builds & JDK

[jun aoki <ja...@apache.org>]

+1 for Jeff's suggestion

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:40 AM, Erin Boyd <eb...@redhat.com> wrote:

> +1 seems reasonable
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jeff Sposetti [jeff@hortonworks.com]
> Received: Monday, 20 Oct 2014, 12:23PM
> To: dev@ambari.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Apache Builds & JDK
>
> Current Ambari JDK support:
> - Oracle JDK 1.6
> - Oracle JDK 1.7
> - OpenJDK 7
>
> I propose the following:
> - With Ambari 1.7.0, we mark Oracle JDK 1.6 as "deprecated" (i.e. still
> supported but this serves as a heads-up that 1.6 will be going away at some
> point and users should move to 1.7)
> - With Ambari 2.0, move to Oracle JDK 1.7 as default for testing
> - Review complete removal of Oracle JDK 1.6 support during a Ambari 2.x
> release
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Judes Sarmiento <js...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
>
> > Given that 1.7 is close to release, I am ok with making builds.a.o use
> JDK
> > 1.6, however, we really need to move to JDK 1.7 as soon as possible
> (maybe
> > for Ambari 2.0) since Oracle Java SE 1.6 hasn't been receiving any public
> > updates since Feb 2013 and even 1.7 will stop getting any public updates
> by
> > April 2015.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 8:15 AM, jun aoki <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Jonathan, yes and your suggestion makes sense.
> > > Short term : we make sure Ambari can be built and work on JDK1.6
> > > Long Term : We figure out a target minimum JDK version.
> > >
> > > Dealing with builds.a.o is a bit painful because
> > > 1. We should set a slave label (a set of slaves) to our jenkins jobs so
> > > that our build executions are distributed.
> > > 2. But slaves in a label do not necessary have the same conf (different
> > JDK
> > > path, etc)
> > > 3. You don't have a SSH access to any slaves.
> > >
> > > I'm very close to show the docker POC that has python 2.6. and JDK 1.6,
> > and
> > > will show it for your review.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 5:10 AM, Jonathan Hurley <
> > jhurley@hortonworks.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Jun,
> > > >
> > > > I think we're in agreement that whatever the Ambari community decides
> > > about
> > > > minimum supported runtimes is what should go on our continuous
> > > integration
> > > > builds. But the actual decision to change what we support is a larger
> > > > discussion that we need to have.
> > > >
> > > > In the short term I still think that the Jenkins builders need to
> > reflect
> > > > the current minimum, which is JDK 6. I don't have permissions to edit
> > > jobs
> > > > on builds.apache.org; if someone who does could try editing the job
> > and
> > > > changing the runtime then we can see if any issues pop up.
> > > >
> > > > This Xcellent email sent from my Moto X; typos intentional.
> > > > On Oct 18, 2014 12:57 AM, "jun aoki" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Jonathan,
> > > > >
> > > > > I have also been hearing JDK 7 more these days.(or less about
> JDK6?)
> > > > > For example Open JDK 7 is default on those OSs.
> > > > >
> > > > > Centos 7
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/ReleaseNotes/CentOS7#head-b02657cf2e223edb2d7946cbc45086d42c2bb41b
> > > > >
> > > > > Ubuntu 14.04 (this is LTS)
> > > > > http://packages.ubuntu.com/trusty/devel/default-jdk
> > > > >
> > > > > Maybe I'm looking into OSs that the Ambari community is not keen
> on.
> > > > > Then what are the OS versions we are targeting?
> > > > > I will ask my PM and share the answer with you guys.
> > > > >
> > > > > Once we have a JDK version we like, then we can put the version
> into
> > > our
> > > > > Docker solution and are good to go (of course, This will be a whole
> > new
> > > > > thing and have you all review my POC and we will start form there)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Jonathan Hurley <
> > > > jhurley@hortonworks.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Jun,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for the reply and discussion about this issue.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I disagree about the JDK version remaining at JDK 7. Although it
> > > might
> > > > be
> > > > > > true that JDK 8 is the latest version with JDK 9 on the horizon,
> > many
> > > > of
> > > > > > the commodity machines that run Ambari are probably better
> equipped
> > > to
> > > > > run
> > > > > > JDK 6. As long as we say Ambari supports JDK 6, I think the
> > > continuous
> > > > > > integration environment must reflect JDK 6 compatibility. With
> JDK
> > 7
> > > as
> > > > > the
> > > > > > build runtime, we cannot possibly enforce that compatibility.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As far as the environment on b.a.o, some of the other jobs that I
> > > > looked
> > > > > > at are built using JDK 1.6.0_20. I think it would probably be
> > simple
> > > > > enough
> > > > > > for Ambari to be built with the same job parameters. I don’t have
> > any
> > > > > > problem with Ambari being installed on a machine with JDK7+, but
> > for
> > > > > > continuous integration builds and tests, it seems like the least
> > > common
> > > > > > denominator (python 2.6 and JDK6) are the right choices.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > With all of that said, docker integration with Jenkins seems like
> > an
> > > > > > interesting idea and I would look forward to seeing a discussion
> of
> > > the
> > > > > > benefits it would give the development community.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Oct 17, 2014, at 10:36 PM, jun aoki <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Jonathan, thank you for raising an important point, and this
> > > matters
> > > > a
> > > > > > lot
> > > > > > > to my next proposal.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In terms of JDK versions, knowing that Oracle has put their
> > > > mainstream
> > > > > > JDK
> > > > > > > as version 1.8 (1), I'm slightly toward to 1.7 which is closer
> to
> > > > 1.8,
> > > > > > but
> > > > > > > I'm open to either version and let the community vote to it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What is my next proposal?
> > > > > > > I have been testing Ambari build on Docker (2) and would like
> to
> > > > > propose
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > > as the trunk and branch commit build once I complete a POC.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Slaves on builds.a.o have a lot of limitations in terms of what
> > > > > > environment
> > > > > > > you want (at least as far as I know) but Docker will enable us
> to
> > > use
> > > > > > > whatever environment we like to support.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > (1) 1.8 is the top list in this download page
> > > > > > >
> > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > (2)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Ambari/job/Ambari-trunk-Commit-docker/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Erin Boyd <eb...@redhat.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Agreed +1 to JDK1.6 and Python 2.6
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > >> From: "Yusaku Sako" <yu...@hortonworks.com>
> > > > > > >> To: dev@ambari.apache.org
> > > > > > >> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 2:27:59 PM
> > > > > > >> Subject: Re: Apache Builds & JDK
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> +1 on JDK 1.6, Python 2.6.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Nate Cole <
> > ncole@hortonworks.com
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>> +1 for JDK 1.6 - I see this as the same reasoning we went
> with
> > > > python
> > > > > > 2.6
> > > > > > >>> vs 2.7.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> On Oct 17, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Jonathan Hurley <
> > > > > jhurley@hortonworks.com>
> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>> Hi All,
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> I introduced a failure on builds.apache.org today; the odd
> > > thing
> > > > > was
> > > > > > >>> that the failing test ran perfectly fine on my local
> > environment
> > > > and
> > > > > on
> > > > > > >>> other developer’s environments. It was a failure in a mock
> > > library
> > > > > and
> > > > > > I
> > > > > > >>> determined it was caused by a JDK version difference. I use
> JDK
> > > 1.6
> > > > > and
> > > > > > >>> builds.apache.org uses JDK 1.7
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> This raises an important question: If Ambari supports JDK
> 1.6,
> > > we
> > > > > > >> should
> > > > > > >>> be building with JDK 1.6 in order to catch compilation
> issues?
> > I
> > > > > could
> > > > > > >>> easily introduce a JDK 1.7 method or class and
> > builds.apache.org
> > > > > won’t
> > > > > > >>> catch it.
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> I’m going to work on fixing my unit test now that I can see
> it
> > > > > failing
> > > > > > >>> after switching to JDK 1.7, but I think we need to change
> > > > > > >>> builds.apache.org to JDK 1.6.
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> Community thoughts?
> > > > > > >>>> --
> > > > > > >>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > > > >>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the
> individual
> > > or
> > > > > > >> entity
> > > > > > >>> to
> > > > > > >>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > > > > confidential,
> > > > > > >>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
> If
> > > the
> > > > > > >> reader
> > > > > > >>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
> hereby
> > > > > notified
> > > > > > >>> that
> > > > > > >>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution,
> disclosure
> > > or
> > > > > > >>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> > you
> > > > have
> > > > > > >>>> received this communication in error, please contact the
> > sender
> > > > > > >>> immediately
> > > > > > >>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> --
> > > > > > >>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > > > >>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the
> individual
> > or
> > > > > > entity
> > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > >>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > > > confidential,
> > > > > > >>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
> If
> > > the
> > > > > > reader
> > > > > > >>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > > > > notified
> > > > > > >> that
> > > > > > >>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution,
> disclosure
> > or
> > > > > > >>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you
> > > > have
> > > > > > >>> received this communication in error, please contact the
> sender
> > > > > > >> immediately
> > > > > > >>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > > > >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual
> > or
> > > > > > entity to
> > > > > > >> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > > > confidential,
> > > > > > >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If
> > the
> > > > > > reader
> > > > > > >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > > > notified
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure
> > or
> > > > > > >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you
> > > have
> > > > > > >> received this communication in error, please contact the
> sender
> > > > > > immediately
> > > > > > >> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > -jun
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> > > > entity
> > > > > to
> > > > > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > confidential,
> > > > > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If
> the
> > > > reader
> > > > > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > > notified
> > > > > that
> > > > > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > > > > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
> > have
> > > > > > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > > > > immediately
> > > > > > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > -jun
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> > entity
> > > to
> > > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> confidential,
> > > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> > reader
> > > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified
> > > that
> > > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> > > > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > > immediately
> > > > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > -jun
> > >
> >
>
> --
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>



-- 
-jun

RE: Apache Builds & JDK

[Erin Boyd <eb...@redhat.com>]

+1 seems reasonable


-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Sposetti [jeff@hortonworks.com]
Received: Monday, 20 Oct 2014, 12:23PM
To: dev@ambari.apache.org
Subject: Re: Apache Builds & JDK

Current Ambari JDK support:
- Oracle JDK 1.6
- Oracle JDK 1.7
- OpenJDK 7

I propose the following:
- With Ambari 1.7.0, we mark Oracle JDK 1.6 as "deprecated" (i.e. still
supported but this serves as a heads-up that 1.6 will be going away at some
point and users should move to 1.7)
- With Ambari 2.0, move to Oracle JDK 1.7 as default for testing
- Review complete removal of Oracle JDK 1.6 support during a Ambari 2.x
release



On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Judes Sarmiento <js...@pivotal.io>
wrote:

> Given that 1.7 is close to release, I am ok with making builds.a.o use JDK
> 1.6, however, we really need to move to JDK 1.7 as soon as possible (maybe
> for Ambari 2.0) since Oracle Java SE 1.6 hasn't been receiving any public
> updates since Feb 2013 and even 1.7 will stop getting any public updates by
> April 2015.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 8:15 AM, jun aoki <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Jonathan, yes and your suggestion makes sense.
> > Short term : we make sure Ambari can be built and work on JDK1.6
> > Long Term : We figure out a target minimum JDK version.
> >
> > Dealing with builds.a.o is a bit painful because
> > 1. We should set a slave label (a set of slaves) to our jenkins jobs so
> > that our build executions are distributed.
> > 2. But slaves in a label do not necessary have the same conf (different
> JDK
> > path, etc)
> > 3. You don't have a SSH access to any slaves.
> >
> > I'm very close to show the docker POC that has python 2.6. and JDK 1.6,
> and
> > will show it for your review.
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 5:10 AM, Jonathan Hurley <
> jhurley@hortonworks.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Jun,
> > >
> > > I think we're in agreement that whatever the Ambari community decides
> > about
> > > minimum supported runtimes is what should go on our continuous
> > integration
> > > builds. But the actual decision to change what we support is a larger
> > > discussion that we need to have.
> > >
> > > In the short term I still think that the Jenkins builders need to
> reflect
> > > the current minimum, which is JDK 6. I don't have permissions to edit
> > jobs
> > > on builds.apache.org; if someone who does could try editing the job
> and
> > > changing the runtime then we can see if any issues pop up.
> > >
> > > This Xcellent email sent from my Moto X; typos intentional.
> > > On Oct 18, 2014 12:57 AM, "jun aoki" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Jonathan,
> > > >
> > > > I have also been hearing JDK 7 more these days.(or less about JDK6?)
> > > > For example Open JDK 7 is default on those OSs.
> > > >
> > > > Centos 7
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/ReleaseNotes/CentOS7#head-b02657cf2e223edb2d7946cbc45086d42c2bb41b
> > > >
> > > > Ubuntu 14.04 (this is LTS)
> > > > http://packages.ubuntu.com/trusty/devel/default-jdk
> > > >
> > > > Maybe I'm looking into OSs that the Ambari community is not keen on.
> > > > Then what are the OS versions we are targeting?
> > > > I will ask my PM and share the answer with you guys.
> > > >
> > > > Once we have a JDK version we like, then we can put the version into
> > our
> > > > Docker solution and are good to go (of course, This will be a whole
> new
> > > > thing and have you all review my POC and we will start form there)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Jonathan Hurley <
> > > jhurley@hortonworks.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Jun,
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the reply and discussion about this issue.
> > > > >
> > > > > I disagree about the JDK version remaining at JDK 7. Although it
> > might
> > > be
> > > > > true that JDK 8 is the latest version with JDK 9 on the horizon,
> many
> > > of
> > > > > the commodity machines that run Ambari are probably better equipped
> > to
> > > > run
> > > > > JDK 6. As long as we say Ambari supports JDK 6, I think the
> > continuous
> > > > > integration environment must reflect JDK 6 compatibility. With JDK
> 7
> > as
> > > > the
> > > > > build runtime, we cannot possibly enforce that compatibility.
> > > > >
> > > > > As far as the environment on b.a.o, some of the other jobs that I
> > > looked
> > > > > at are built using JDK 1.6.0_20. I think it would probably be
> simple
> > > > enough
> > > > > for Ambari to be built with the same job parameters. I don’t have
> any
> > > > > problem with Ambari being installed on a machine with JDK7+, but
> for
> > > > > continuous integration builds and tests, it seems like the least
> > common
> > > > > denominator (python 2.6 and JDK6) are the right choices.
> > > > >
> > > > > With all of that said, docker integration with Jenkins seems like
> an
> > > > > interesting idea and I would look forward to seeing a discussion of
> > the
> > > > > benefits it would give the development community.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Oct 17, 2014, at 10:36 PM, jun aoki <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Jonathan, thank you for raising an important point, and this
> > matters
> > > a
> > > > > lot
> > > > > > to my next proposal.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In terms of JDK versions, knowing that Oracle has put their
> > > mainstream
> > > > > JDK
> > > > > > as version 1.8 (1), I'm slightly toward to 1.7 which is closer to
> > > 1.8,
> > > > > but
> > > > > > I'm open to either version and let the community vote to it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What is my next proposal?
> > > > > > I have been testing Ambari build on Docker (2) and would like to
> > > > propose
> > > > > it
> > > > > > as the trunk and branch commit build once I complete a POC.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Slaves on builds.a.o have a lot of limitations in terms of what
> > > > > environment
> > > > > > you want (at least as far as I know) but Docker will enable us to
> > use
> > > > > > whatever environment we like to support.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > (1) 1.8 is the top list in this download page
> > > > > >
> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > (2)
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Ambari/job/Ambari-trunk-Commit-docker/
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Erin Boyd <eb...@redhat.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Agreed +1 to JDK1.6 and Python 2.6
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > >> From: "Yusaku Sako" <yu...@hortonworks.com>
> > > > > >> To: dev@ambari.apache.org
> > > > > >> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 2:27:59 PM
> > > > > >> Subject: Re: Apache Builds & JDK
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> +1 on JDK 1.6, Python 2.6.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Nate Cole <
> ncole@hortonworks.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> +1 for JDK 1.6 - I see this as the same reasoning we went with
> > > python
> > > > > 2.6
> > > > > >>> vs 2.7.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> On Oct 17, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Jonathan Hurley <
> > > > jhurley@hortonworks.com>
> > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>> Hi All,
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> I introduced a failure on builds.apache.org today; the odd
> > thing
> > > > was
> > > > > >>> that the failing test ran perfectly fine on my local
> environment
> > > and
> > > > on
> > > > > >>> other developer’s environments. It was a failure in a mock
> > library
> > > > and
> > > > > I
> > > > > >>> determined it was caused by a JDK version difference. I use JDK
> > 1.6
> > > > and
> > > > > >>> builds.apache.org uses JDK 1.7
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> This raises an important question: If Ambari supports JDK 1.6,
> > we
> > > > > >> should
> > > > > >>> be building with JDK 1.6 in order to catch compilation issues?
> I
> > > > could
> > > > > >>> easily introduce a JDK 1.7 method or class and
> builds.apache.org
> > > > won’t
> > > > > >>> catch it.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> I’m going to work on fixing my unit test now that I can see it
> > > > failing
> > > > > >>> after switching to JDK 1.7, but I think we need to change
> > > > > >>> builds.apache.org to JDK 1.6.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Community thoughts?
> > > > > >>>> --
> > > > > >>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > > >>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual
> > or
> > > > > >> entity
> > > > > >>> to
> > > > > >>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > > > confidential,
> > > > > >>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If
> > the
> > > > > >> reader
> > > > > >>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > > > notified
> > > > > >>> that
> > > > > >>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure
> > or
> > > > > >>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you
> > > have
> > > > > >>>> received this communication in error, please contact the
> sender
> > > > > >>> immediately
> > > > > >>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> --
> > > > > >>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > > >>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual
> or
> > > > > entity
> > > > > >> to
> > > > > >>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > > confidential,
> > > > > >>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If
> > the
> > > > > reader
> > > > > >>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > > > notified
> > > > > >> that
> > > > > >>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure
> or
> > > > > >>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
> > > have
> > > > > >>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > > > > >> immediately
> > > > > >>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> --
> > > > > >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > > >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual
> or
> > > > > entity to
> > > > > >> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > > confidential,
> > > > > >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If
> the
> > > > > reader
> > > > > >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > > notified
> > > > > that
> > > > > >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure
> or
> > > > > >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
> > have
> > > > > >> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > > > > immediately
> > > > > >> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > -jun
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> > > entity
> > > > to
> > > > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > confidential,
> > > > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> > > reader
> > > > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > notified
> > > > that
> > > > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > > > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
> have
> > > > > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > > > immediately
> > > > > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > -jun
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> entity
> > to
> > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> reader
> > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> > that
> > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> > > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > immediately
> > > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > -jun
> >
>

-- 
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to 
which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, 
privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader 
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that 
any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or 
forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately 
and delete it from your system. Thank You.

Re: Apache Builds & JDK

[Newton Alex <na...@pivotal.io>]

+1 to Jeff's proposal.

Thanks,
Newton

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:23 AM, Jeff Sposetti <je...@hortonworks.com>
wrote:

> Current Ambari JDK support:
> - Oracle JDK 1.6
> - Oracle JDK 1.7
> - OpenJDK 7
>
> I propose the following:
> - With Ambari 1.7.0, we mark Oracle JDK 1.6 as "deprecated" (i.e. still
> supported but this serves as a heads-up that 1.6 will be going away at some
> point and users should move to 1.7)
> - With Ambari 2.0, move to Oracle JDK 1.7 as default for testing
> - Review complete removal of Oracle JDK 1.6 support during a Ambari 2.x
> release
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Judes Sarmiento <js...@pivotal.io>
> wrote:
>
> > Given that 1.7 is close to release, I am ok with making builds.a.o use
> JDK
> > 1.6, however, we really need to move to JDK 1.7 as soon as possible
> (maybe
> > for Ambari 2.0) since Oracle Java SE 1.6 hasn't been receiving any public
> > updates since Feb 2013 and even 1.7 will stop getting any public updates
> by
> > April 2015.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 8:15 AM, jun aoki <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Jonathan, yes and your suggestion makes sense.
> > > Short term : we make sure Ambari can be built and work on JDK1.6
> > > Long Term : We figure out a target minimum JDK version.
> > >
> > > Dealing with builds.a.o is a bit painful because
> > > 1. We should set a slave label (a set of slaves) to our jenkins jobs so
> > > that our build executions are distributed.
> > > 2. But slaves in a label do not necessary have the same conf (different
> > JDK
> > > path, etc)
> > > 3. You don't have a SSH access to any slaves.
> > >
> > > I'm very close to show the docker POC that has python 2.6. and JDK 1.6,
> > and
> > > will show it for your review.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 5:10 AM, Jonathan Hurley <
> > jhurley@hortonworks.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Jun,
> > > >
> > > > I think we're in agreement that whatever the Ambari community decides
> > > about
> > > > minimum supported runtimes is what should go on our continuous
> > > integration
> > > > builds. But the actual decision to change what we support is a larger
> > > > discussion that we need to have.
> > > >
> > > > In the short term I still think that the Jenkins builders need to
> > reflect
> > > > the current minimum, which is JDK 6. I don't have permissions to edit
> > > jobs
> > > > on builds.apache.org; if someone who does could try editing the job
> > and
> > > > changing the runtime then we can see if any issues pop up.
> > > >
> > > > This Xcellent email sent from my Moto X; typos intentional.
> > > > On Oct 18, 2014 12:57 AM, "jun aoki" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Jonathan,
> > > > >
> > > > > I have also been hearing JDK 7 more these days.(or less about
> JDK6?)
> > > > > For example Open JDK 7 is default on those OSs.
> > > > >
> > > > > Centos 7
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/ReleaseNotes/CentOS7#head-b02657cf2e223edb2d7946cbc45086d42c2bb41b
> > > > >
> > > > > Ubuntu 14.04 (this is LTS)
> > > > > http://packages.ubuntu.com/trusty/devel/default-jdk
> > > > >
> > > > > Maybe I'm looking into OSs that the Ambari community is not keen
> on.
> > > > > Then what are the OS versions we are targeting?
> > > > > I will ask my PM and share the answer with you guys.
> > > > >
> > > > > Once we have a JDK version we like, then we can put the version
> into
> > > our
> > > > > Docker solution and are good to go (of course, This will be a whole
> > new
> > > > > thing and have you all review my POC and we will start form there)
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Jonathan Hurley <
> > > > jhurley@hortonworks.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi Jun,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for the reply and discussion about this issue.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I disagree about the JDK version remaining at JDK 7. Although it
> > > might
> > > > be
> > > > > > true that JDK 8 is the latest version with JDK 9 on the horizon,
> > many
> > > > of
> > > > > > the commodity machines that run Ambari are probably better
> equipped
> > > to
> > > > > run
> > > > > > JDK 6. As long as we say Ambari supports JDK 6, I think the
> > > continuous
> > > > > > integration environment must reflect JDK 6 compatibility. With
> JDK
> > 7
> > > as
> > > > > the
> > > > > > build runtime, we cannot possibly enforce that compatibility.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As far as the environment on b.a.o, some of the other jobs that I
> > > > looked
> > > > > > at are built using JDK 1.6.0_20. I think it would probably be
> > simple
> > > > > enough
> > > > > > for Ambari to be built with the same job parameters. I don’t have
> > any
> > > > > > problem with Ambari being installed on a machine with JDK7+, but
> > for
> > > > > > continuous integration builds and tests, it seems like the least
> > > common
> > > > > > denominator (python 2.6 and JDK6) are the right choices.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > With all of that said, docker integration with Jenkins seems like
> > an
> > > > > > interesting idea and I would look forward to seeing a discussion
> of
> > > the
> > > > > > benefits it would give the development community.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Oct 17, 2014, at 10:36 PM, jun aoki <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Jonathan, thank you for raising an important point, and this
> > > matters
> > > > a
> > > > > > lot
> > > > > > > to my next proposal.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > In terms of JDK versions, knowing that Oracle has put their
> > > > mainstream
> > > > > > JDK
> > > > > > > as version 1.8 (1), I'm slightly toward to 1.7 which is closer
> to
> > > > 1.8,
> > > > > > but
> > > > > > > I'm open to either version and let the community vote to it.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What is my next proposal?
> > > > > > > I have been testing Ambari build on Docker (2) and would like
> to
> > > > > propose
> > > > > > it
> > > > > > > as the trunk and branch commit build once I complete a POC.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Slaves on builds.a.o have a lot of limitations in terms of what
> > > > > > environment
> > > > > > > you want (at least as far as I know) but Docker will enable us
> to
> > > use
> > > > > > > whatever environment we like to support.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > (1) 1.8 is the top list in this download page
> > > > > > >
> > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > (2)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Ambari/job/Ambari-trunk-Commit-docker/
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Erin Boyd <eb...@redhat.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> Agreed +1 to JDK1.6 and Python 2.6
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > >> From: "Yusaku Sako" <yu...@hortonworks.com>
> > > > > > >> To: dev@ambari.apache.org
> > > > > > >> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 2:27:59 PM
> > > > > > >> Subject: Re: Apache Builds & JDK
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> +1 on JDK 1.6, Python 2.6.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Nate Cole <
> > ncole@hortonworks.com
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >>> +1 for JDK 1.6 - I see this as the same reasoning we went
> with
> > > > python
> > > > > > 2.6
> > > > > > >>> vs 2.7.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> On Oct 17, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Jonathan Hurley <
> > > > > jhurley@hortonworks.com>
> > > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>> Hi All,
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> I introduced a failure on builds.apache.org today; the odd
> > > thing
> > > > > was
> > > > > > >>> that the failing test ran perfectly fine on my local
> > environment
> > > > and
> > > > > on
> > > > > > >>> other developer’s environments. It was a failure in a mock
> > > library
> > > > > and
> > > > > > I
> > > > > > >>> determined it was caused by a JDK version difference. I use
> JDK
> > > 1.6
> > > > > and
> > > > > > >>> builds.apache.org uses JDK 1.7
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> This raises an important question: If Ambari supports JDK
> 1.6,
> > > we
> > > > > > >> should
> > > > > > >>> be building with JDK 1.6 in order to catch compilation
> issues?
> > I
> > > > > could
> > > > > > >>> easily introduce a JDK 1.7 method or class and
> > builds.apache.org
> > > > > won’t
> > > > > > >>> catch it.
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> I’m going to work on fixing my unit test now that I can see
> it
> > > > > failing
> > > > > > >>> after switching to JDK 1.7, but I think we need to change
> > > > > > >>> builds.apache.org to JDK 1.6.
> > > > > > >>>>
> > > > > > >>>> Community thoughts?
> > > > > > >>>> --
> > > > > > >>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > > > >>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the
> individual
> > > or
> > > > > > >> entity
> > > > > > >>> to
> > > > > > >>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > > > > confidential,
> > > > > > >>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
> If
> > > the
> > > > > > >> reader
> > > > > > >>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are
> hereby
> > > > > notified
> > > > > > >>> that
> > > > > > >>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution,
> disclosure
> > > or
> > > > > > >>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> > you
> > > > have
> > > > > > >>>> received this communication in error, please contact the
> > sender
> > > > > > >>> immediately
> > > > > > >>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>> --
> > > > > > >>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > > > >>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the
> individual
> > or
> > > > > > entity
> > > > > > >> to
> > > > > > >>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > > > confidential,
> > > > > > >>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law.
> If
> > > the
> > > > > > reader
> > > > > > >>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > > > > notified
> > > > > > >> that
> > > > > > >>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution,
> disclosure
> > or
> > > > > > >>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you
> > > > have
> > > > > > >>> received this communication in error, please contact the
> sender
> > > > > > >> immediately
> > > > > > >>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > > > >>>
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> --
> > > > > > >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > > > >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual
> > or
> > > > > > entity to
> > > > > > >> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > > > confidential,
> > > > > > >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If
> > the
> > > > > > reader
> > > > > > >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > > > notified
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure
> > or
> > > > > > >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you
> > > have
> > > > > > >> received this communication in error, please contact the
> sender
> > > > > > immediately
> > > > > > >> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > -jun
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> > > > entity
> > > > > to
> > > > > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > confidential,
> > > > > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If
> the
> > > > reader
> > > > > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > > notified
> > > > > that
> > > > > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > > > > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
> > have
> > > > > > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > > > > immediately
> > > > > > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > -jun
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> > entity
> > > to
> > > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> confidential,
> > > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> > reader
> > > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified
> > > that
> > > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> > > > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > > immediately
> > > > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > -jun
> > >
> >
>
> --
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>

Re: Apache Builds & JDK

[Jeff Sposetti <je...@hortonworks.com>]

Current Ambari JDK support:
- Oracle JDK 1.6
- Oracle JDK 1.7
- OpenJDK 7

I propose the following:
- With Ambari 1.7.0, we mark Oracle JDK 1.6 as "deprecated" (i.e. still
supported but this serves as a heads-up that 1.6 will be going away at some
point and users should move to 1.7)
- With Ambari 2.0, move to Oracle JDK 1.7 as default for testing
- Review complete removal of Oracle JDK 1.6 support during a Ambari 2.x
release



On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Judes Sarmiento <js...@pivotal.io>
wrote:

> Given that 1.7 is close to release, I am ok with making builds.a.o use JDK
> 1.6, however, we really need to move to JDK 1.7 as soon as possible (maybe
> for Ambari 2.0) since Oracle Java SE 1.6 hasn't been receiving any public
> updates since Feb 2013 and even 1.7 will stop getting any public updates by
> April 2015.
>
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 8:15 AM, jun aoki <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Jonathan, yes and your suggestion makes sense.
> > Short term : we make sure Ambari can be built and work on JDK1.6
> > Long Term : We figure out a target minimum JDK version.
> >
> > Dealing with builds.a.o is a bit painful because
> > 1. We should set a slave label (a set of slaves) to our jenkins jobs so
> > that our build executions are distributed.
> > 2. But slaves in a label do not necessary have the same conf (different
> JDK
> > path, etc)
> > 3. You don't have a SSH access to any slaves.
> >
> > I'm very close to show the docker POC that has python 2.6. and JDK 1.6,
> and
> > will show it for your review.
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 5:10 AM, Jonathan Hurley <
> jhurley@hortonworks.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Jun,
> > >
> > > I think we're in agreement that whatever the Ambari community decides
> > about
> > > minimum supported runtimes is what should go on our continuous
> > integration
> > > builds. But the actual decision to change what we support is a larger
> > > discussion that we need to have.
> > >
> > > In the short term I still think that the Jenkins builders need to
> reflect
> > > the current minimum, which is JDK 6. I don't have permissions to edit
> > jobs
> > > on builds.apache.org; if someone who does could try editing the job
> and
> > > changing the runtime then we can see if any issues pop up.
> > >
> > > This Xcellent email sent from my Moto X; typos intentional.
> > > On Oct 18, 2014 12:57 AM, "jun aoki" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Jonathan,
> > > >
> > > > I have also been hearing JDK 7 more these days.(or less about JDK6?)
> > > > For example Open JDK 7 is default on those OSs.
> > > >
> > > > Centos 7
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> http://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/ReleaseNotes/CentOS7#head-b02657cf2e223edb2d7946cbc45086d42c2bb41b
> > > >
> > > > Ubuntu 14.04 (this is LTS)
> > > > http://packages.ubuntu.com/trusty/devel/default-jdk
> > > >
> > > > Maybe I'm looking into OSs that the Ambari community is not keen on.
> > > > Then what are the OS versions we are targeting?
> > > > I will ask my PM and share the answer with you guys.
> > > >
> > > > Once we have a JDK version we like, then we can put the version into
> > our
> > > > Docker solution and are good to go (of course, This will be a whole
> new
> > > > thing and have you all review my POC and we will start form there)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Jonathan Hurley <
> > > jhurley@hortonworks.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hi Jun,
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for the reply and discussion about this issue.
> > > > >
> > > > > I disagree about the JDK version remaining at JDK 7. Although it
> > might
> > > be
> > > > > true that JDK 8 is the latest version with JDK 9 on the horizon,
> many
> > > of
> > > > > the commodity machines that run Ambari are probably better equipped
> > to
> > > > run
> > > > > JDK 6. As long as we say Ambari supports JDK 6, I think the
> > continuous
> > > > > integration environment must reflect JDK 6 compatibility. With JDK
> 7
> > as
> > > > the
> > > > > build runtime, we cannot possibly enforce that compatibility.
> > > > >
> > > > > As far as the environment on b.a.o, some of the other jobs that I
> > > looked
> > > > > at are built using JDK 1.6.0_20. I think it would probably be
> simple
> > > > enough
> > > > > for Ambari to be built with the same job parameters. I don’t have
> any
> > > > > problem with Ambari being installed on a machine with JDK7+, but
> for
> > > > > continuous integration builds and tests, it seems like the least
> > common
> > > > > denominator (python 2.6 and JDK6) are the right choices.
> > > > >
> > > > > With all of that said, docker integration with Jenkins seems like
> an
> > > > > interesting idea and I would look forward to seeing a discussion of
> > the
> > > > > benefits it would give the development community.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Oct 17, 2014, at 10:36 PM, jun aoki <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Jonathan, thank you for raising an important point, and this
> > matters
> > > a
> > > > > lot
> > > > > > to my next proposal.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In terms of JDK versions, knowing that Oracle has put their
> > > mainstream
> > > > > JDK
> > > > > > as version 1.8 (1), I'm slightly toward to 1.7 which is closer to
> > > 1.8,
> > > > > but
> > > > > > I'm open to either version and let the community vote to it.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > What is my next proposal?
> > > > > > I have been testing Ambari build on Docker (2) and would like to
> > > > propose
> > > > > it
> > > > > > as the trunk and branch commit build once I complete a POC.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Slaves on builds.a.o have a lot of limitations in terms of what
> > > > > environment
> > > > > > you want (at least as far as I know) but Docker will enable us to
> > use
> > > > > > whatever environment we like to support.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > (1) 1.8 is the top list in this download page
> > > > > >
> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > (2)
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Ambari/job/Ambari-trunk-Commit-docker/
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Erin Boyd <eb...@redhat.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Agreed +1 to JDK1.6 and Python 2.6
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > >> From: "Yusaku Sako" <yu...@hortonworks.com>
> > > > > >> To: dev@ambari.apache.org
> > > > > >> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 2:27:59 PM
> > > > > >> Subject: Re: Apache Builds & JDK
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> +1 on JDK 1.6, Python 2.6.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Nate Cole <
> ncole@hortonworks.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> +1 for JDK 1.6 - I see this as the same reasoning we went with
> > > python
> > > > > 2.6
> > > > > >>> vs 2.7.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> On Oct 17, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Jonathan Hurley <
> > > > jhurley@hortonworks.com>
> > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>> Hi All,
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> I introduced a failure on builds.apache.org today; the odd
> > thing
> > > > was
> > > > > >>> that the failing test ran perfectly fine on my local
> environment
> > > and
> > > > on
> > > > > >>> other developer’s environments. It was a failure in a mock
> > library
> > > > and
> > > > > I
> > > > > >>> determined it was caused by a JDK version difference. I use JDK
> > 1.6
> > > > and
> > > > > >>> builds.apache.org uses JDK 1.7
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> This raises an important question: If Ambari supports JDK 1.6,
> > we
> > > > > >> should
> > > > > >>> be building with JDK 1.6 in order to catch compilation issues?
> I
> > > > could
> > > > > >>> easily introduce a JDK 1.7 method or class and
> builds.apache.org
> > > > won’t
> > > > > >>> catch it.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> I’m going to work on fixing my unit test now that I can see it
> > > > failing
> > > > > >>> after switching to JDK 1.7, but I think we need to change
> > > > > >>> builds.apache.org to JDK 1.6.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Community thoughts?
> > > > > >>>> --
> > > > > >>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > > >>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual
> > or
> > > > > >> entity
> > > > > >>> to
> > > > > >>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > > > confidential,
> > > > > >>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If
> > the
> > > > > >> reader
> > > > > >>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > > > notified
> > > > > >>> that
> > > > > >>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure
> > or
> > > > > >>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If
> you
> > > have
> > > > > >>>> received this communication in error, please contact the
> sender
> > > > > >>> immediately
> > > > > >>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> --
> > > > > >>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > > >>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual
> or
> > > > > entity
> > > > > >> to
> > > > > >>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > > confidential,
> > > > > >>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If
> > the
> > > > > reader
> > > > > >>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > > > notified
> > > > > >> that
> > > > > >>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure
> or
> > > > > >>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
> > > have
> > > > > >>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > > > > >> immediately
> > > > > >>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> --
> > > > > >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > > >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual
> or
> > > > > entity to
> > > > > >> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > > confidential,
> > > > > >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If
> the
> > > > > reader
> > > > > >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > > notified
> > > > > that
> > > > > >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure
> or
> > > > > >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
> > have
> > > > > >> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > > > > immediately
> > > > > >> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > -jun
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> > > entity
> > > > to
> > > > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > confidential,
> > > > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> > > reader
> > > > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > notified
> > > > that
> > > > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > > > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
> have
> > > > > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > > > immediately
> > > > > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > -jun
> > > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> entity
> > to
> > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> reader
> > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> > that
> > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> > > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > immediately
> > > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > -jun
> >
>

-- 
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to 
which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, 
privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader 
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that 
any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or 
forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately 
and delete it from your system. Thank You.

Re: Apache Builds & JDK

[Judes Sarmiento <js...@pivotal.io>]

Given that 1.7 is close to release, I am ok with making builds.a.o use JDK
1.6, however, we really need to move to JDK 1.7 as soon as possible (maybe
for Ambari 2.0) since Oracle Java SE 1.6 hasn't been receiving any public
updates since Feb 2013 and even 1.7 will stop getting any public updates by
April 2015.



On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 8:15 AM, jun aoki <ja...@apache.org> wrote:

> Jonathan, yes and your suggestion makes sense.
> Short term : we make sure Ambari can be built and work on JDK1.6
> Long Term : We figure out a target minimum JDK version.
>
> Dealing with builds.a.o is a bit painful because
> 1. We should set a slave label (a set of slaves) to our jenkins jobs so
> that our build executions are distributed.
> 2. But slaves in a label do not necessary have the same conf (different JDK
> path, etc)
> 3. You don't have a SSH access to any slaves.
>
> I'm very close to show the docker POC that has python 2.6. and JDK 1.6, and
> will show it for your review.
>
>
> On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 5:10 AM, Jonathan Hurley <jh...@hortonworks.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Jun,
> >
> > I think we're in agreement that whatever the Ambari community decides
> about
> > minimum supported runtimes is what should go on our continuous
> integration
> > builds. But the actual decision to change what we support is a larger
> > discussion that we need to have.
> >
> > In the short term I still think that the Jenkins builders need to reflect
> > the current minimum, which is JDK 6. I don't have permissions to edit
> jobs
> > on builds.apache.org; if someone who does could try editing the job and
> > changing the runtime then we can see if any issues pop up.
> >
> > This Xcellent email sent from my Moto X; typos intentional.
> > On Oct 18, 2014 12:57 AM, "jun aoki" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Jonathan,
> > >
> > > I have also been hearing JDK 7 more these days.(or less about JDK6?)
> > > For example Open JDK 7 is default on those OSs.
> > >
> > > Centos 7
> > >
> > >
> >
> http://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/ReleaseNotes/CentOS7#head-b02657cf2e223edb2d7946cbc45086d42c2bb41b
> > >
> > > Ubuntu 14.04 (this is LTS)
> > > http://packages.ubuntu.com/trusty/devel/default-jdk
> > >
> > > Maybe I'm looking into OSs that the Ambari community is not keen on.
> > > Then what are the OS versions we are targeting?
> > > I will ask my PM and share the answer with you guys.
> > >
> > > Once we have a JDK version we like, then we can put the version into
> our
> > > Docker solution and are good to go (of course, This will be a whole new
> > > thing and have you all review my POC and we will start form there)
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Jonathan Hurley <
> > jhurley@hortonworks.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Jun,
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for the reply and discussion about this issue.
> > > >
> > > > I disagree about the JDK version remaining at JDK 7. Although it
> might
> > be
> > > > true that JDK 8 is the latest version with JDK 9 on the horizon, many
> > of
> > > > the commodity machines that run Ambari are probably better equipped
> to
> > > run
> > > > JDK 6. As long as we say Ambari supports JDK 6, I think the
> continuous
> > > > integration environment must reflect JDK 6 compatibility. With JDK 7
> as
> > > the
> > > > build runtime, we cannot possibly enforce that compatibility.
> > > >
> > > > As far as the environment on b.a.o, some of the other jobs that I
> > looked
> > > > at are built using JDK 1.6.0_20. I think it would probably be simple
> > > enough
> > > > for Ambari to be built with the same job parameters. I don’t have any
> > > > problem with Ambari being installed on a machine with JDK7+, but for
> > > > continuous integration builds and tests, it seems like the least
> common
> > > > denominator (python 2.6 and JDK6) are the right choices.
> > > >
> > > > With all of that said, docker integration with Jenkins seems like an
> > > > interesting idea and I would look forward to seeing a discussion of
> the
> > > > benefits it would give the development community.
> > > >
> > > > On Oct 17, 2014, at 10:36 PM, jun aoki <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Jonathan, thank you for raising an important point, and this
> matters
> > a
> > > > lot
> > > > > to my next proposal.
> > > > >
> > > > > In terms of JDK versions, knowing that Oracle has put their
> > mainstream
> > > > JDK
> > > > > as version 1.8 (1), I'm slightly toward to 1.7 which is closer to
> > 1.8,
> > > > but
> > > > > I'm open to either version and let the community vote to it.
> > > > >
> > > > > What is my next proposal?
> > > > > I have been testing Ambari build on Docker (2) and would like to
> > > propose
> > > > it
> > > > > as the trunk and branch commit build once I complete a POC.
> > > > >
> > > > > Slaves on builds.a.o have a lot of limitations in terms of what
> > > > environment
> > > > > you want (at least as far as I know) but Docker will enable us to
> use
> > > > > whatever environment we like to support.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > (1) 1.8 is the top list in this download page
> > > > > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html
> > > > >
> > > > > (2)
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Ambari/job/Ambari-trunk-Commit-docker/
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Erin Boyd <eb...@redhat.com>
> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> Agreed +1 to JDK1.6 and Python 2.6
> > > > >>
> > > > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > > > >> From: "Yusaku Sako" <yu...@hortonworks.com>
> > > > >> To: dev@ambari.apache.org
> > > > >> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 2:27:59 PM
> > > > >> Subject: Re: Apache Builds & JDK
> > > > >>
> > > > >> +1 on JDK 1.6, Python 2.6.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Nate Cole <ncole@hortonworks.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >>> +1 for JDK 1.6 - I see this as the same reasoning we went with
> > python
> > > > 2.6
> > > > >>> vs 2.7.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> On Oct 17, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Jonathan Hurley <
> > > jhurley@hortonworks.com>
> > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>> Hi All,
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> I introduced a failure on builds.apache.org today; the odd
> thing
> > > was
> > > > >>> that the failing test ran perfectly fine on my local environment
> > and
> > > on
> > > > >>> other developer’s environments. It was a failure in a mock
> library
> > > and
> > > > I
> > > > >>> determined it was caused by a JDK version difference. I use JDK
> 1.6
> > > and
> > > > >>> builds.apache.org uses JDK 1.7
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> This raises an important question: If Ambari supports JDK 1.6,
> we
> > > > >> should
> > > > >>> be building with JDK 1.6 in order to catch compilation issues? I
> > > could
> > > > >>> easily introduce a JDK 1.7 method or class and builds.apache.org
> > > won’t
> > > > >>> catch it.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> I’m going to work on fixing my unit test now that I can see it
> > > failing
> > > > >>> after switching to JDK 1.7, but I think we need to change
> > > > >>> builds.apache.org to JDK 1.6.
> > > > >>>>
> > > > >>>> Community thoughts?
> > > > >>>> --
> > > > >>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > >>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual
> or
> > > > >> entity
> > > > >>> to
> > > > >>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > > confidential,
> > > > >>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If
> the
> > > > >> reader
> > > > >>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > > notified
> > > > >>> that
> > > > >>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure
> or
> > > > >>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
> > have
> > > > >>>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > > > >>> immediately
> > > > >>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> --
> > > > >>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > >>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> > > > entity
> > > > >> to
> > > > >>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > confidential,
> > > > >>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If
> the
> > > > reader
> > > > >>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > > notified
> > > > >> that
> > > > >>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > > > >>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
> > have
> > > > >>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > > > >> immediately
> > > > >>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> --
> > > > >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> > > > entity to
> > > > >> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > confidential,
> > > > >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> > > > reader
> > > > >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > notified
> > > > that
> > > > >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > > > >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
> have
> > > > >> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > > > immediately
> > > > >> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > -jun
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> > entity
> > > to
> > > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> confidential,
> > > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> > reader
> > > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified
> > > that
> > > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> > > > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > > immediately
> > > > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > -jun
> > >
> >
> > --
> > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity
> to
> > which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
> > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> that
> > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately
> > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> >
>
>
>
> --
> -jun
>

Re: Apache Builds & JDK

[jun aoki <ja...@apache.org>]

Jonathan, yes and your suggestion makes sense.
Short term : we make sure Ambari can be built and work on JDK1.6
Long Term : We figure out a target minimum JDK version.

Dealing with builds.a.o is a bit painful because
1. We should set a slave label (a set of slaves) to our jenkins jobs so
that our build executions are distributed.
2. But slaves in a label do not necessary have the same conf (different JDK
path, etc)
3. You don't have a SSH access to any slaves.

I'm very close to show the docker POC that has python 2.6. and JDK 1.6, and
will show it for your review.


On Sun, Oct 19, 2014 at 5:10 AM, Jonathan Hurley <jh...@hortonworks.com>
wrote:

> Jun,
>
> I think we're in agreement that whatever the Ambari community decides about
> minimum supported runtimes is what should go on our continuous integration
> builds. But the actual decision to change what we support is a larger
> discussion that we need to have.
>
> In the short term I still think that the Jenkins builders need to reflect
> the current minimum, which is JDK 6. I don't have permissions to edit jobs
> on builds.apache.org; if someone who does could try editing the job and
> changing the runtime then we can see if any issues pop up.
>
> This Xcellent email sent from my Moto X; typos intentional.
> On Oct 18, 2014 12:57 AM, "jun aoki" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Jonathan,
> >
> > I have also been hearing JDK 7 more these days.(or less about JDK6?)
> > For example Open JDK 7 is default on those OSs.
> >
> > Centos 7
> >
> >
> http://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/ReleaseNotes/CentOS7#head-b02657cf2e223edb2d7946cbc45086d42c2bb41b
> >
> > Ubuntu 14.04 (this is LTS)
> > http://packages.ubuntu.com/trusty/devel/default-jdk
> >
> > Maybe I'm looking into OSs that the Ambari community is not keen on.
> > Then what are the OS versions we are targeting?
> > I will ask my PM and share the answer with you guys.
> >
> > Once we have a JDK version we like, then we can put the version into our
> > Docker solution and are good to go (of course, This will be a whole new
> > thing and have you all review my POC and we will start form there)
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Jonathan Hurley <
> jhurley@hortonworks.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Jun,
> > >
> > > Thanks for the reply and discussion about this issue.
> > >
> > > I disagree about the JDK version remaining at JDK 7. Although it might
> be
> > > true that JDK 8 is the latest version with JDK 9 on the horizon, many
> of
> > > the commodity machines that run Ambari are probably better equipped to
> > run
> > > JDK 6. As long as we say Ambari supports JDK 6, I think the continuous
> > > integration environment must reflect JDK 6 compatibility. With JDK 7 as
> > the
> > > build runtime, we cannot possibly enforce that compatibility.
> > >
> > > As far as the environment on b.a.o, some of the other jobs that I
> looked
> > > at are built using JDK 1.6.0_20. I think it would probably be simple
> > enough
> > > for Ambari to be built with the same job parameters. I don’t have any
> > > problem with Ambari being installed on a machine with JDK7+, but for
> > > continuous integration builds and tests, it seems like the least common
> > > denominator (python 2.6 and JDK6) are the right choices.
> > >
> > > With all of that said, docker integration with Jenkins seems like an
> > > interesting idea and I would look forward to seeing a discussion of the
> > > benefits it would give the development community.
> > >
> > > On Oct 17, 2014, at 10:36 PM, jun aoki <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Jonathan, thank you for raising an important point, and this matters
> a
> > > lot
> > > > to my next proposal.
> > > >
> > > > In terms of JDK versions, knowing that Oracle has put their
> mainstream
> > > JDK
> > > > as version 1.8 (1), I'm slightly toward to 1.7 which is closer to
> 1.8,
> > > but
> > > > I'm open to either version and let the community vote to it.
> > > >
> > > > What is my next proposal?
> > > > I have been testing Ambari build on Docker (2) and would like to
> > propose
> > > it
> > > > as the trunk and branch commit build once I complete a POC.
> > > >
> > > > Slaves on builds.a.o have a lot of limitations in terms of what
> > > environment
> > > > you want (at least as far as I know) but Docker will enable us to use
> > > > whatever environment we like to support.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > (1) 1.8 is the top list in this download page
> > > > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html
> > > >
> > > > (2)
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Ambari/job/Ambari-trunk-Commit-docker/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Erin Boyd <eb...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> Agreed +1 to JDK1.6 and Python 2.6
> > > >>
> > > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > > >> From: "Yusaku Sako" <yu...@hortonworks.com>
> > > >> To: dev@ambari.apache.org
> > > >> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 2:27:59 PM
> > > >> Subject: Re: Apache Builds & JDK
> > > >>
> > > >> +1 on JDK 1.6, Python 2.6.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Nate Cole <nc...@hortonworks.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> +1 for JDK 1.6 - I see this as the same reasoning we went with
> python
> > > 2.6
> > > >>> vs 2.7.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> On Oct 17, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Jonathan Hurley <
> > jhurley@hortonworks.com>
> > > >>> wrote:
> > > >>>
> > > >>>> Hi All,
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I introduced a failure on builds.apache.org today; the odd thing
> > was
> > > >>> that the failing test ran perfectly fine on my local environment
> and
> > on
> > > >>> other developer’s environments. It was a failure in a mock library
> > and
> > > I
> > > >>> determined it was caused by a JDK version difference. I use JDK 1.6
> > and
> > > >>> builds.apache.org uses JDK 1.7
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> This raises an important question: If Ambari supports JDK 1.6, we
> > > >> should
> > > >>> be building with JDK 1.6 in order to catch compilation issues? I
> > could
> > > >>> easily introduce a JDK 1.7 method or class and builds.apache.org
> > won’t
> > > >>> catch it.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> I’m going to work on fixing my unit test now that I can see it
> > failing
> > > >>> after switching to JDK 1.7, but I think we need to change
> > > >>> builds.apache.org to JDK 1.6.
> > > >>>>
> > > >>>> Community thoughts?
> > > >>>> --
> > > >>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > >>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> > > >> entity
> > > >>> to
> > > >>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > > confidential,
> > > >>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> > > >> reader
> > > >>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > notified
> > > >>> that
> > > >>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > > >>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
> have
> > > >>>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > > >>> immediately
> > > >>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > >>>
> > > >>>
> > > >>> --
> > > >>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > >>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> > > entity
> > > >> to
> > > >>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > confidential,
> > > >>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> > > reader
> > > >>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> > notified
> > > >> that
> > > >>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > > >>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you
> have
> > > >>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > > >> immediately
> > > >>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> > > entity to
> > > >> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > confidential,
> > > >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> > > reader
> > > >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified
> > > that
> > > >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > > >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> > > >> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > > immediately
> > > >> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > -jun
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> entity
> > to
> > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> reader
> > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> > that
> > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> > > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > immediately
> > > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > -jun
> >
>
> --
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>



-- 
-jun

Re: Apache Builds & JDK

[Jonathan Hurley <jh...@hortonworks.com>]

Jun,

I think we're in agreement that whatever the Ambari community decides about
minimum supported runtimes is what should go on our continuous integration
builds. But the actual decision to change what we support is a larger
discussion that we need to have.

In the short term I still think that the Jenkins builders need to reflect
the current minimum, which is JDK 6. I don't have permissions to edit jobs
on builds.apache.org; if someone who does could try editing the job and
changing the runtime then we can see if any issues pop up.

This Xcellent email sent from my Moto X; typos intentional.
On Oct 18, 2014 12:57 AM, "jun aoki" <ja...@apache.org> wrote:

> Jonathan,
>
> I have also been hearing JDK 7 more these days.(or less about JDK6?)
> For example Open JDK 7 is default on those OSs.
>
> Centos 7
>
> http://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/ReleaseNotes/CentOS7#head-b02657cf2e223edb2d7946cbc45086d42c2bb41b
>
> Ubuntu 14.04 (this is LTS)
> http://packages.ubuntu.com/trusty/devel/default-jdk
>
> Maybe I'm looking into OSs that the Ambari community is not keen on.
> Then what are the OS versions we are targeting?
> I will ask my PM and share the answer with you guys.
>
> Once we have a JDK version we like, then we can put the version into our
> Docker solution and are good to go (of course, This will be a whole new
> thing and have you all review my POC and we will start form there)
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Jonathan Hurley <jh...@hortonworks.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Jun,
> >
> > Thanks for the reply and discussion about this issue.
> >
> > I disagree about the JDK version remaining at JDK 7. Although it might be
> > true that JDK 8 is the latest version with JDK 9 on the horizon, many of
> > the commodity machines that run Ambari are probably better equipped to
> run
> > JDK 6. As long as we say Ambari supports JDK 6, I think the continuous
> > integration environment must reflect JDK 6 compatibility. With JDK 7 as
> the
> > build runtime, we cannot possibly enforce that compatibility.
> >
> > As far as the environment on b.a.o, some of the other jobs that I looked
> > at are built using JDK 1.6.0_20. I think it would probably be simple
> enough
> > for Ambari to be built with the same job parameters. I don’t have any
> > problem with Ambari being installed on a machine with JDK7+, but for
> > continuous integration builds and tests, it seems like the least common
> > denominator (python 2.6 and JDK6) are the right choices.
> >
> > With all of that said, docker integration with Jenkins seems like an
> > interesting idea and I would look forward to seeing a discussion of the
> > benefits it would give the development community.
> >
> > On Oct 17, 2014, at 10:36 PM, jun aoki <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Jonathan, thank you for raising an important point, and this matters a
> > lot
> > > to my next proposal.
> > >
> > > In terms of JDK versions, knowing that Oracle has put their mainstream
> > JDK
> > > as version 1.8 (1), I'm slightly toward to 1.7 which is closer to 1.8,
> > but
> > > I'm open to either version and let the community vote to it.
> > >
> > > What is my next proposal?
> > > I have been testing Ambari build on Docker (2) and would like to
> propose
> > it
> > > as the trunk and branch commit build once I complete a POC.
> > >
> > > Slaves on builds.a.o have a lot of limitations in terms of what
> > environment
> > > you want (at least as far as I know) but Docker will enable us to use
> > > whatever environment we like to support.
> > >
> > >
> > > (1) 1.8 is the top list in this download page
> > > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html
> > >
> > > (2)
> > >
> >
> https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Ambari/job/Ambari-trunk-Commit-docker/
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Erin Boyd <eb...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Agreed +1 to JDK1.6 and Python 2.6
> > >>
> > >> ----- Original Message -----
> > >> From: "Yusaku Sako" <yu...@hortonworks.com>
> > >> To: dev@ambari.apache.org
> > >> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 2:27:59 PM
> > >> Subject: Re: Apache Builds & JDK
> > >>
> > >> +1 on JDK 1.6, Python 2.6.
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Nate Cole <nc...@hortonworks.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> +1 for JDK 1.6 - I see this as the same reasoning we went with python
> > 2.6
> > >>> vs 2.7.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> On Oct 17, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Jonathan Hurley <
> jhurley@hortonworks.com>
> > >>> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Hi All,
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I introduced a failure on builds.apache.org today; the odd thing
> was
> > >>> that the failing test ran perfectly fine on my local environment and
> on
> > >>> other developer’s environments. It was a failure in a mock library
> and
> > I
> > >>> determined it was caused by a JDK version difference. I use JDK 1.6
> and
> > >>> builds.apache.org uses JDK 1.7
> > >>>>
> > >>>> This raises an important question: If Ambari supports JDK 1.6, we
> > >> should
> > >>> be building with JDK 1.6 in order to catch compilation issues? I
> could
> > >>> easily introduce a JDK 1.7 method or class and builds.apache.org
> won’t
> > >>> catch it.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> I’m going to work on fixing my unit test now that I can see it
> failing
> > >>> after switching to JDK 1.7, but I think we need to change
> > >>> builds.apache.org to JDK 1.6.
> > >>>>
> > >>>> Community thoughts?
> > >>>> --
> > >>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > >>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> > >> entity
> > >>> to
> > >>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> > confidential,
> > >>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> > >> reader
> > >>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified
> > >>> that
> > >>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > >>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> > >>>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > >>> immediately
> > >>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> --
> > >>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > >>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> > entity
> > >> to
> > >>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> confidential,
> > >>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> > reader
> > >>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby
> notified
> > >> that
> > >>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > >>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> > >>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > >> immediately
> > >>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > >>>
> > >>
> > >> --
> > >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> > entity to
> > >> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> confidential,
> > >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> > reader
> > >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> > that
> > >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> > >> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > immediately
> > >> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > -jun
> >
> >
> > --
> > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity
> to
> > which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
> > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> that
> > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately
> > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> >
>
>
>
> --
> -jun
>

-- 
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to 
which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, 
privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader 
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that 
any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or 
forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately 
and delete it from your system. Thank You.

Re: Apache Builds & JDK

[jun aoki <ja...@apache.org>]

Jonathan,

I have also been hearing JDK 7 more these days.(or less about JDK6?)
For example Open JDK 7 is default on those OSs.

Centos 7
http://wiki.centos.org/Manuals/ReleaseNotes/CentOS7#head-b02657cf2e223edb2d7946cbc45086d42c2bb41b

Ubuntu 14.04 (this is LTS)
http://packages.ubuntu.com/trusty/devel/default-jdk

Maybe I'm looking into OSs that the Ambari community is not keen on.
Then what are the OS versions we are targeting?
I will ask my PM and share the answer with you guys.

Once we have a JDK version we like, then we can put the version into our
Docker solution and are good to go (of course, This will be a whole new
thing and have you all review my POC and we will start form there)


On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 7:52 PM, Jonathan Hurley <jh...@hortonworks.com>
wrote:

> Hi Jun,
>
> Thanks for the reply and discussion about this issue.
>
> I disagree about the JDK version remaining at JDK 7. Although it might be
> true that JDK 8 is the latest version with JDK 9 on the horizon, many of
> the commodity machines that run Ambari are probably better equipped to run
> JDK 6. As long as we say Ambari supports JDK 6, I think the continuous
> integration environment must reflect JDK 6 compatibility. With JDK 7 as the
> build runtime, we cannot possibly enforce that compatibility.
>
> As far as the environment on b.a.o, some of the other jobs that I looked
> at are built using JDK 1.6.0_20. I think it would probably be simple enough
> for Ambari to be built with the same job parameters. I don’t have any
> problem with Ambari being installed on a machine with JDK7+, but for
> continuous integration builds and tests, it seems like the least common
> denominator (python 2.6 and JDK6) are the right choices.
>
> With all of that said, docker integration with Jenkins seems like an
> interesting idea and I would look forward to seeing a discussion of the
> benefits it would give the development community.
>
> On Oct 17, 2014, at 10:36 PM, jun aoki <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > Jonathan, thank you for raising an important point, and this matters a
> lot
> > to my next proposal.
> >
> > In terms of JDK versions, knowing that Oracle has put their mainstream
> JDK
> > as version 1.8 (1), I'm slightly toward to 1.7 which is closer to 1.8,
> but
> > I'm open to either version and let the community vote to it.
> >
> > What is my next proposal?
> > I have been testing Ambari build on Docker (2) and would like to propose
> it
> > as the trunk and branch commit build once I complete a POC.
> >
> > Slaves on builds.a.o have a lot of limitations in terms of what
> environment
> > you want (at least as far as I know) but Docker will enable us to use
> > whatever environment we like to support.
> >
> >
> > (1) 1.8 is the top list in this download page
> > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html
> >
> > (2)
> >
> https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Ambari/job/Ambari-trunk-Commit-docker/
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Erin Boyd <eb...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Agreed +1 to JDK1.6 and Python 2.6
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: "Yusaku Sako" <yu...@hortonworks.com>
> >> To: dev@ambari.apache.org
> >> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 2:27:59 PM
> >> Subject: Re: Apache Builds & JDK
> >>
> >> +1 on JDK 1.6, Python 2.6.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Nate Cole <nc...@hortonworks.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1 for JDK 1.6 - I see this as the same reasoning we went with python
> 2.6
> >>> vs 2.7.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Oct 17, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Jonathan Hurley <jh...@hortonworks.com>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Hi All,
> >>>>
> >>>> I introduced a failure on builds.apache.org today; the odd thing was
> >>> that the failing test ran perfectly fine on my local environment and on
> >>> other developer’s environments. It was a failure in a mock library and
> I
> >>> determined it was caused by a JDK version difference. I use JDK 1.6 and
> >>> builds.apache.org uses JDK 1.7
> >>>>
> >>>> This raises an important question: If Ambari supports JDK 1.6, we
> >> should
> >>> be building with JDK 1.6 in order to catch compilation issues? I could
> >>> easily introduce a JDK 1.7 method or class and builds.apache.org won’t
> >>> catch it.
> >>>>
> >>>> I’m going to work on fixing my unit test now that I can see it failing
> >>> after switching to JDK 1.7, but I think we need to change
> >>> builds.apache.org to JDK 1.6.
> >>>>
> >>>> Community thoughts?
> >>>> --
> >>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> >>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> >> entity
> >>> to
> >>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is
> confidential,
> >>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> >> reader
> >>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> >>> that
> >>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> >>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> >>>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> >>> immediately
> >>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> >>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> entity
> >> to
> >>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> >>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> reader
> >>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> >> that
> >>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> >>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> >>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> >> immediately
> >>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> >>>
> >>
> >> --
> >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> entity to
> >> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> reader
> >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> that
> >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> >> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately
> >> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > -jun
>
>
> --
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>



-- 
-jun

Re: Apache Builds & JDK

[Jonathan Hurley <jh...@hortonworks.com>]

Hi Jun,

Thanks for the reply and discussion about this issue. 

I disagree about the JDK version remaining at JDK 7. Although it might be true that JDK 8 is the latest version with JDK 9 on the horizon, many of the commodity machines that run Ambari are probably better equipped to run JDK 6. As long as we say Ambari supports JDK 6, I think the continuous integration environment must reflect JDK 6 compatibility. With JDK 7 as the build runtime, we cannot possibly enforce that compatibility.

As far as the environment on b.a.o, some of the other jobs that I looked at are built using JDK 1.6.0_20. I think it would probably be simple enough for Ambari to be built with the same job parameters. I don’t have any problem with Ambari being installed on a machine with JDK7+, but for continuous integration builds and tests, it seems like the least common denominator (python 2.6 and JDK6) are the right choices.

With all of that said, docker integration with Jenkins seems like an interesting idea and I would look forward to seeing a discussion of the benefits it would give the development community.

On Oct 17, 2014, at 10:36 PM, jun aoki <ja...@apache.org> wrote:

> Jonathan, thank you for raising an important point, and this matters a lot
> to my next proposal.
> 
> In terms of JDK versions, knowing that Oracle has put their mainstream JDK
> as version 1.8 (1), I'm slightly toward to 1.7 which is closer to 1.8, but
> I'm open to either version and let the community vote to it.
> 
> What is my next proposal?
> I have been testing Ambari build on Docker (2) and would like to propose it
> as the trunk and branch commit build once I complete a POC.
> 
> Slaves on builds.a.o have a lot of limitations in terms of what environment
> you want (at least as far as I know) but Docker will enable us to use
> whatever environment we like to support.
> 
> 
> (1) 1.8 is the top list in this download page
> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html
> 
> (2)
> https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Ambari/job/Ambari-trunk-Commit-docker/
> 
> 
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Erin Boyd <eb...@redhat.com> wrote:
> 
>> Agreed +1 to JDK1.6 and Python 2.6
>> 
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Yusaku Sako" <yu...@hortonworks.com>
>> To: dev@ambari.apache.org
>> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 2:27:59 PM
>> Subject: Re: Apache Builds & JDK
>> 
>> +1 on JDK 1.6, Python 2.6.
>> 
>> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Nate Cole <nc...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> +1 for JDK 1.6 - I see this as the same reasoning we went with python 2.6
>>> vs 2.7.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Oct 17, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Jonathan Hurley <jh...@hortonworks.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> Hi All,
>>>> 
>>>> I introduced a failure on builds.apache.org today; the odd thing was
>>> that the failing test ran perfectly fine on my local environment and on
>>> other developer’s environments. It was a failure in a mock library and I
>>> determined it was caused by a JDK version difference. I use JDK 1.6 and
>>> builds.apache.org uses JDK 1.7
>>>> 
>>>> This raises an important question: If Ambari supports JDK 1.6, we
>> should
>>> be building with JDK 1.6 in order to catch compilation issues? I could
>>> easily introduce a JDK 1.7 method or class and builds.apache.org won’t
>>> catch it.
>>>> 
>>>> I’m going to work on fixing my unit test now that I can see it failing
>>> after switching to JDK 1.7, but I think we need to change
>>> builds.apache.org to JDK 1.6.
>>>> 
>>>> Community thoughts?
>>>> --
>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
>>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
>> entity
>>> to
>>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
>>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
>> reader
>>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
>>> that
>>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
>>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
>>>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
>>> immediately
>>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity
>> to
>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
>> that
>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
>>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender
>> immediately
>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>>> 
>> 
>> --
>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
>> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> -jun


-- 
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to 
which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, 
privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader 
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that 
any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or 
forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately 
and delete it from your system. Thank You.

Re: Apache Builds & JDK

[jun aoki <ja...@apache.org>]

Jonathan, thank you for raising an important point, and this matters a lot
to my next proposal.

In terms of JDK versions, knowing that Oracle has put their mainstream JDK
as version 1.8 (1), I'm slightly toward to 1.7 which is closer to 1.8, but
I'm open to either version and let the community vote to it.

What is my next proposal?
I have been testing Ambari build on Docker (2) and would like to propose it
as the trunk and branch commit build once I complete a POC.

Slaves on builds.a.o have a lot of limitations in terms of what environment
you want (at least as far as I know) but Docker will enable us to use
whatever environment we like to support.


(1) 1.8 is the top list in this download page
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html

(2)
https://builds.apache.org/view/A-D/view/Ambari/job/Ambari-trunk-Commit-docker/


On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 2:37 PM, Erin Boyd <eb...@redhat.com> wrote:

> Agreed +1 to JDK1.6 and Python 2.6
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Yusaku Sako" <yu...@hortonworks.com>
> To: dev@ambari.apache.org
> Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 2:27:59 PM
> Subject: Re: Apache Builds & JDK
>
> +1 on JDK 1.6, Python 2.6.
>
> On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Nate Cole <nc...@hortonworks.com> wrote:
>
> > +1 for JDK 1.6 - I see this as the same reasoning we went with python 2.6
> > vs 2.7.
> >
> >
> > On Oct 17, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Jonathan Hurley <jh...@hortonworks.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi All,
> > >
> > > I introduced a failure on builds.apache.org today; the odd thing was
> > that the failing test ran perfectly fine on my local environment and on
> > other developer’s environments. It was a failure in a mock library and I
> > determined it was caused by a JDK version difference. I use JDK 1.6 and
> > builds.apache.org uses JDK 1.7
> > >
> > > This raises an important question: If Ambari supports JDK 1.6, we
> should
> > be building with JDK 1.6 in order to catch compilation issues? I could
> > easily introduce a JDK 1.7 method or class and builds.apache.org won’t
> > catch it.
> > >
> > > I’m going to work on fixing my unit test now that I can see it failing
> > after switching to JDK 1.7, but I think we need to change
> > builds.apache.org to JDK 1.6.
> > >
> > > Community thoughts?
> > > --
> > > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or
> entity
> > to
> > > which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> > > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the
> reader
> > > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> > that
> > > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> > > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> > immediately
> > > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> >
> >
> > --
> > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity
> to
> > which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
> > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> that
> > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately
> > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
> >
>
> --
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>



-- 
-jun

Re: Apache Builds & JDK

[Erin Boyd <eb...@redhat.com>]

Agreed +1 to JDK1.6 and Python 2.6

----- Original Message -----
From: "Yusaku Sako" <yu...@hortonworks.com>
To: dev@ambari.apache.org
Sent: Friday, October 17, 2014 2:27:59 PM
Subject: Re: Apache Builds & JDK

+1 on JDK 1.6, Python 2.6.

On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Nate Cole <nc...@hortonworks.com> wrote:

> +1 for JDK 1.6 - I see this as the same reasoning we went with python 2.6
> vs 2.7.
>
>
> On Oct 17, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Jonathan Hurley <jh...@hortonworks.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I introduced a failure on builds.apache.org today; the odd thing was
> that the failing test ran perfectly fine on my local environment and on
> other developer’s environments. It was a failure in a mock library and I
> determined it was caused by a JDK version difference. I use JDK 1.6 and
> builds.apache.org uses JDK 1.7
> >
> > This raises an important question: If Ambari supports JDK 1.6, we should
> be building with JDK 1.6 in order to catch compilation issues? I could
> easily introduce a JDK 1.7 method or class and builds.apache.org won’t
> catch it.
> >
> > I’m going to work on fixing my unit test now that I can see it failing
> after switching to JDK 1.7, but I think we need to change
> builds.apache.org to JDK 1.6.
> >
> > Community thoughts?
> > --
> > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity
> to
> > which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
> > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> that
> > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately
> > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>
>
> --
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>

-- 
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to 
which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, 
privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader 
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that 
any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or 
forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately 
and delete it from your system. Thank You.

Re: Apache Builds & JDK

[Yusaku Sako <yu...@hortonworks.com>]

+1 on JDK 1.6, Python 2.6.

On Fri, Oct 17, 2014 at 1:26 PM, Nate Cole <nc...@hortonworks.com> wrote:

> +1 for JDK 1.6 - I see this as the same reasoning we went with python 2.6
> vs 2.7.
>
>
> On Oct 17, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Jonathan Hurley <jh...@hortonworks.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi All,
> >
> > I introduced a failure on builds.apache.org today; the odd thing was
> that the failing test ran perfectly fine on my local environment and on
> other developer’s environments. It was a failure in a mock library and I
> determined it was caused by a JDK version difference. I use JDK 1.6 and
> builds.apache.org uses JDK 1.7
> >
> > This raises an important question: If Ambari supports JDK 1.6, we should
> be building with JDK 1.6 in order to catch compilation issues? I could
> easily introduce a JDK 1.7 method or class and builds.apache.org won’t
> catch it.
> >
> > I’m going to work on fixing my unit test now that I can see it failing
> after switching to JDK 1.7, but I think we need to change
> builds.apache.org to JDK 1.6.
> >
> > Community thoughts?
> > --
> > CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> > NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity
> to
> > which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> > privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
> > of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified
> that
> > any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> > forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> > received this communication in error, please contact the sender
> immediately
> > and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>
>
> --
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to
> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential,
> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader
> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that
> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or
> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have
> received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately
> and delete it from your system. Thank You.
>

-- 
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to 
which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, 
privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader 
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that 
any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or 
forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately 
and delete it from your system. Thank You.

Re: Apache Builds & JDK

[Nate Cole <nc...@hortonworks.com>]

+1 for JDK 1.6 - I see this as the same reasoning we went with python 2.6 vs 2.7.


On Oct 17, 2014, at 4:22 PM, Jonathan Hurley <jh...@hortonworks.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
> 
> I introduced a failure on builds.apache.org today; the odd thing was that the failing test ran perfectly fine on my local environment and on other developer’s environments. It was a failure in a mock library and I determined it was caused by a JDK version difference. I use JDK 1.6 and builds.apache.org uses JDK 1.7
> 
> This raises an important question: If Ambari supports JDK 1.6, we should be building with JDK 1.6 in order to catch compilation issues? I could easily introduce a JDK 1.7 method or class and builds.apache.org won’t catch it.
> 
> I’m going to work on fixing my unit test now that I can see it failing after switching to JDK 1.7, but I think we need to change builds.apache.org to JDK 1.6.
> 
> Community thoughts?
> -- 
> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to 
> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, 
> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader 
> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that 
> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or 
> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have 
> received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately 
> and delete it from your system. Thank You.


-- 
CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to 
which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, 
privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader 
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that 
any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or 
forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have 
received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately 
and delete it from your system. Thank You.