Most issues on the previous migration were related to changes on behavior
of class-loading on Java 11. It seems Oracle is taking a more backwards
compatible on latest releases, so let's hope everything will go well. In
the meantime I tested the upgrade locally and tests are passing ok so we
should be good to go. I opened a PR [1] for the version upgrade and
assuming consensus on this proposal I expect we can pass to vote soon.

[1] https://github.com/apache/beam/pull/14766


On Sun, May 9, 2021 at 6:13 PM Reuven Lax <[email protected]> wrote:

> We've had some issues in the past with semantic changes in ByteBuddy (I
> think related to new Java versions) that required rewriting code in Beam.
>
> On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 10:46 PM Ismaël Mejía <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> What were the issues last time Reuven? I remember that the release and
>> upgrade PR were pretty smooth, were there unintended consequences from the
>> library changes themselves?
>>
>>
>> On Sun, May 9, 2021 at 12:36 AM Reuven Lax <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Sounds good. Based on previous experience though, this might be a
>>> difficult upgrade to do.
>>>
>>> On Sat, May 8, 2021 at 12:57 AM Ismaël Mejía <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The version of bytebuddy Beam is vendoring (1.10.8) is already 16
>>>> months old and
>>>> it is not compatible with more recent versions of Java. I would like to
>>>> propose
>>>> that we upgrade it [1] to the most recent version (1.11.0) [2] so we
>>>> can benefit
>>>> of the latest improvements for Java 16/17 and upgraded ASM.
>>>>
>>>> If everyone agrees I would like to volunteer as the release manager for
>>>> this
>>>> upgrade.
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BEAM-12241
>>>> [2] https://github.com/raphw/byte-buddy/blob/master/release-notes.md
>>>>
>>>>

Reply via email to