[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-18106?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17689350#comment-17689350
 ] 

Brandon Williams commented on CASSANDRA-18106:
----------------------------------------------

I have a branch in progress 
[here|https://github.com/driftx/ccm/tree/CASSANDRA-18106] that builds on 
Ekaterina's initial patch, and is enough to run the dtests without any errors 
that seem to be python's fault.  It keys on '4.2' but this should continue to 
work after CASSANDRA-17973.

The problem with not having CASSANDRA_USE_JDK17 is that 4.0 uses 
CASSANDRA_USE_JDK11 to adjust not just build versions, but run versions as 
well, and JdkProperties only really indicates build versions.  Currently, if 
you have CASSANDRA-18133, this patch will always use 17 because it appears in 
the supported versions.  I'm not sure if we need a way to control this, or what 
the best way would be now.

bq. I think we will need to push the CCM patch and the switch to JdkProperties 
one after another as otherwise we need to add intermediate code which sounds 
counter-productive to me

If this patch doesn't find the supported versions from JdkProperties it will 
default to 11, so I think it should be safe to push first in that regard.

> Update CCM for JDK17 and revise current JDK detection strategy
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-18106
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-18106
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Task
>          Components: CI
>            Reporter: Ekaterina Dimitrova
>            Assignee: Brandon Williams
>            Priority: Normal
>             Fix For: 4.x
>
>
> As part of CASSANDRA-16895 initial POC an initial version of CCM patch was 
> created. This needs to be revisited and reviewed
> Recently we closed CASSANDRA-18039 which brought questions, probably we need 
> to revise how we detect JDK versions in CCM and whether it is correct. To the 
> best of my knowledge there are certain tests in the repo around that and they 
> pass so my guess is we need to revise just the strategy and maybe document it 
> explicitly or consider if we want any changes to be applied. Also, we need to 
> be careful with breaking changes. 



--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to