But I wouldn’t hold jdk upgrade over it. Just setting out priorities.
On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 12:56 PM Emmanuel Hugonnet <[email protected]> wrote: > Well it discovers some issues like > > activemq-artemis/artemis-cli/src/main/java/org/apache/activemq/artemis/cli/commands/check/QueueCheck.java:[104,55] > [FormatString] extra > format arguments: used 0, provided 1 > [ERROR] (see https://errorprone.info/bugpattern/FormatString) > > Le 29/05/2020 à 18:36, Justin Bertram a écrit : > > I agree 100% on ditching error prone if it's blocking us. > > > > > > Justin > > > > On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:34 AM Clebert Suconic < > [email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> I'm not in love with error prone. if it's blocking us to move to a > >> newer JDK i say it goes away (at least for now).. if at a later point > >> it's again compatible we put it back on. > >> > >> On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 12:21 PM Emmanuel Hugonnet <[email protected] > > > >> wrote: > >>> Hello, > >>> > >>> Alas yes as otherwise you need to configure the compilation with > >> error-prone and jboss logging annotation processor., and future > annotation > >>> processors. > >>> > >>> It was the less intrusive way from my point of view. > >>> > >>> Emmanuel > >>> > >>> Le 29/05/2020 à 18:10, Robbie Gemmell a écrit : > >>>> Is it really necessary to add error-prone definition to almost every > >>>> module? Presumably theres some module it isnt defined in. No other > >>>> workarounds for that? > >>>> > >>>> I also wonder about this bit: > >>>> > >> > https://github.com/apache/activemq-artemis/compare/master...clebertsuconic:java_11#diff-600376dffeb79835ede4a0b285078036R1437 > >>>> It refers to a javac.version property that doesnt seem to exist? Other > >>>> exmaples of error-prone config using that seem to set it explicitly. > >>>> > >>>> Robbie > >>>> > >>>> On Fri, 29 May 2020 at 16:56, Clebert Suconic < > >> [email protected]> wrote: > >>>>> @Emmanuel: I rebased your branch here: > >>>>> https://github.com/clebertsuconic/activemq-artemis/tree/java_11 > >>>>> > >>>>> Perhaps you may want to take a look. > >>>>> > >>>>> On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:54 AM Clebert Suconic > >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>> so, if we switched to JDK 11 on the CI, those would still work with > >>>>>> the trick you used? > >>>>>> > >>>>>> On Fri, May 29, 2020 at 11:39 AM Emmanuel Hugonnet < > >> [email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>>> I changed the way the classloaders where working with JDK 11 using > >> the plateform classloader as the parent instead of null so that I could > >>>>>>> access the required modules. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Emmanuel > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Le 29/05/2020 à 17:37, Clebert Suconic a écrit : > >>>>>>>> We should come back into this... > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> How did you fix the compatibility tests with JDK 11? do you need > >> JDK 8 > >>>>>>>> to run the compatibility tests? > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 3:19 PM Emmanuel Hugonnet < > >> [email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>>>>> No relation to WildFly, just for the 'fun' of it and because > >> switching my JAVA_HOME and PATH each time I wxanted to build was > itching me > >> too > >>>>>>>>> much ;) > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> It can wait and get some baking :) > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Emmanuel > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> Le 08/05/2020 à 19:47, Clebert Suconic a écrit : > >>>>>>>>>> Oh wow.. that's awesome. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Can we do the migration after the 2.13.0 release? I have pretty > >> much > >>>>>>>>>> everything ready to go (besides a few changes we have to make > >> next > >>>>>>>>>> week). doing this migration now would probably delay the > release. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> Or you have some requirement for Wildfly that you must do this > >> now? if > >>>>>>>>>> you do we can eventually delay it.. but I would prefer doing it > >> for > >>>>>>>>>> later. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 6:24 AM Emmanuel Hugonnet < > >> [email protected]> wrote: > >>>>>>>>>>> Hello, > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> When i need to work on Apache ActiveMQ Artemis I need to switch > >> my local environement to use OpenJDK 8 instead of the default OpenJDK 11 > >>>>>>>>>>> which I use to develop. > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I have started a branch > >> https://github.com/ehsavoie/activemq-artemis/tree/java_11 which builds > on > >> OpenJDK 8 and 11 with the fast-tests profile. > >>>>>>>>>>> mvn clean install -Pfast-tests is passing for me locally :) > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> I don't think that the CI or the release should use Java 11 but > >> I hope this will smoothen the time when the migration occurs. > >>>>>>>>>>> Also I couldn't use the --release 8 flag for OpenJDK 11 because > >> of the use of Unsafe, if someone has a better alternative I'm all hears. > >>>>>>>>>>> Do you want me to sumbit a PR for this ? Does this make sense > >> to the community ? > >>>>>>>>>>> Emmanuel > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>> -- > >>>>>> Clebert Suconic > >>>>> > >>>>> -- > >>>>> Clebert Suconic > >> > >> -- > >> Clebert Suconic > >> > >> > > -- Clebert Suconic
