Thanks Enrico for the feedback.
I am new to Maven so am trying to understand this better. I see that the
pom.xml in the base bookkeeper directory has the following lines:
<plugin>
<artifactId>maven-compiler-plugin</artifactId>
<version>3.0</version>
<configuration>
* <source>1.7</source>*
* <target>1.7</target>*
<compilerArguments>
<Werror />
<Xlint:deprecation />
<Xlint:unchecked />
</compilerArguments>
</configuration>
</plugin>
So it looks like the source can make use of only Java 7 features currently.
Also, when I do the following:
1. Build using "mvn clean install -DskipTests" from the bookkeeper directory
2. Get the Bookie.class from the "bookkeeper-server-4.4.0-SNAPSHOT.jar" file
3. javap -verbose Bookie.class | grep -i "Major"
I get the value 51 which indicates that the class has been built for Java
7. So my understanding of your mail is that the Java 7 binaries generated
run well on Java 8 JVM. Is that accurate ?
My worry was about the incompatibilities that have been mentioned in the
compatibility docs.
Thanks,
Arun
On Tue, Apr 19, 2016 at 11:35 PM, Enrico Olivelli <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Hi Arun,
> BookKeeper 4.3.2 is compiled for java6. New upcoming release will leverage
> Java7 features like autocloseable.
> There is no need to change the pom.xml in order to make it compatible with
> java8.
> I'm running it on java8 since ever.
>
> --Enrico
>
> Il Mer 20 Apr 2016 05:16 Arun M. Krishnakumar <[email protected]> ha
> scritto:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > We are moving to Java 8 at our company since Java 7 has reached its end
> of
> > life and our IT policies require the move.
> >
> > Is there a plan to officially announce support for Bookkeeper on JDK 1.8
> ?
> > If it is already present or if a support matrix is documented somewhere
> > could someone please point me to it ?
> >
> > I see in the pom.xml that there is still the 1.7 version specified. I
> have
> > run the bookkeeper tests and our own higher level tests on 1.8 and there
> > are no failures. If needed, I can raise a bug for it with the pom.xml
> > patch.
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Arun
> >
> --
>
>
> -- Enrico Olivelli
>
