+1 to creating a 1.10.0 derived from 1.9 that bumps the Java requirement to 8, and doing so instead of releasing 1.9.4.
I think the java version bump will help with maintaining patches that can be more easily backported to 1.x. If this vote passes, I will advocate for 1.10 to be used as the LTS instead of 1.9 in the LTS discussion. On Thu, Oct 31, 2019 at 8:37 PM Ed Coleman <edcole...@apache.org> wrote: > > As suggested in the LTS discussion ([LAZY][VOTE] A basic, but concrete, LTS > proposal), I'm breaking this out to as a separate thread to keep the topic > distinct. > > > The proposal - I would like to start the formal release process for a 1.10 > version that would change the java language level to java 8. The release > would be based on the current 1.9 branch and would be released instead of a > 1.9.4. The 1.10 release would not contain additional feature changes that > are not present in the current 1.9 branch. Currently, this would be based > on the commit SHA: > > > 328ffa0849981e0f113dfbf539c832b447e06902 - committed Thu Oct 10. > > > (I am unaware of any bug-fixes or issues in the pipe line that would / > should be included - but hopefully this makes the intention clear.) > > > The goal is to provide a candidate for LTS nomination that is based on the > current 1.9.x code, but unifies our currently supported branches to all use > java 8 as the supported language level. While this had been discussed in > the past, enough time has passed that a java 8 requirement now, seems to > me, to be unlikely to impact any customers that would look to upgrade > Accumulo past a 1.9.3 version and have them not running at least java 8. > Having our code base with a modern, unified java language support level > would greatly benefit our development and reduce the burden to support our > multiple branches. > > > This vote will be held open for at least the standard 72 hours.
