True, Quarkus is more of a concern and from the discussion so far in the Quarkus mailing list, change could happen for them as well, therefore we can delay dropping Java 8 only for a specific time frame to allow some buffer. But we have to agree now that we want to *drop* Java 8 and move to either Java 11 or 14 let's say at the beginning of 2021 (subject to change on what we agree on), in order to avoid similar discussion later when time comes.
Regards, Omar On Wed, Jul 1, 2020 at 7:58 AM Andrea Cosentino <anco...@gmail.com> wrote: > Personally I see only Quarkus decision as a concern, we can review the > timeline for dropping the Java 8 support. > > I do believe that is almost impossible to have a codebase working on Java > 8, 11 and 14 and the more time we wait to drop java 8 much more it will be > the work needed to support Java 14 and later. > > Il giorno mar 30 giu 2020 alle ore 21:03 Jean-Baptiste Onofre < > j...@nanthrax.net> ha scritto: > > > My point is more about the "form". I’m not against, but it seems we have > > concerns from several people now. So, even if it has been discussed, > maybe > > we didn’t do a vote or having formal vote. > > > > Anyway, if you think it’s good enough from a community perspective, I’m > > fine with that, and again agree to move forward dropping Java8, but it’s > > weird we have concerns only now (and not during the discussion) ;) > > > > Regards > > JB > > > > > Le 30 juin 2020 à 18:46, Andrea Cosentino > <ancosen1...@yahoo.com.INVALID> > > a écrit : > > > > > > It has been already discussed and it's been reported in blog post and > > everywhere. It has been said early enough for sure. > > > > > > -- > > > Andrea Cosentino > > > ---------------------------------- > > > Apache Camel PMC Chair > > > Apache Karaf Committer > > > Apache Servicemix PMC Member > > > Email: ancosen1...@yahoo.com > > > Twitter: @oscerd2 > > > Github: oscerd > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, June 30, 2020, 05:12:31 PM GMT+2, Jean-Baptiste Onofre < > > j...@nanthrax.net> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think we are all agree about that. But it should be discussed and > > announce early enough. > > > > > > Today, I don’t think we really leverage JDK 9+ stuff. > > > > > > Regards > > > JB > > > > > >> Le 30 juin 2020 à 13:49, Omar Al-Safi <o...@oalsafi.com> a écrit : > > >> > > >> My question would be, until when we will need to keep Java 8? I mean > > sure, > > >> given the current circumstances, it might make sense to delay dropping > > Java > > >> 8 only for some time, but honestly would be nice if we can embrace the > > new > > >> change and massive efforts that are being brought into Java to have > > >> modernized (especially the new features being Java 14). It would be a > > pity > > >> if we can't enjoy these new features being brought in by the Java > > community > > >> and I don't want to see us stucking with Java 8 for another 10 years. > > >> The change has to be forced at some point of the chain in order to > > trickle > > >> down. > > >> > > >> These are only my thoughts on this subject. > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> Omar > > >> > > >> On Tue, Jun 30, 2020 at 1:33 PM Luca Burgazzoli < > lburgazz...@gmail.com> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> I don't think that migrating to a new version also means that we need > > to > > >>> embrace every new feature automatically but that we can use them when > > it > > >>> makes sense but staying with an older version means that we can't use > > them > > >>> in any case. > > >>> > > >>> --- > > >>> Luca Burgazzoli > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 10:23 PM Guillaume Nodet <gno...@apache.org> > > >>> wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Note that we changed a bunch of lambda expressions back to anonymous > > >>>> classes a few months ago, so trying to get to the latest is not > always > > >>> the > > >>>> best choice. > > >>>> I'm not sure we need to drop Java 8 now. We can defer that decision > > >>> until > > >>>> we have more incentive I think., > > >>>> > > >>>> Le lun. 29 juin 2020 à 18:01, Peter Palaga <ppal...@redhat.com> a > > écrit > > >>> : > > >>>> > > >>>>> On 29/06/2020 11:59, Peter Palaga wrote: > > >>>>>> On 29/06/2020 07:29, Claus Ibsen wrote: > > >>>>>>> Hi > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> On Sun, Jun 28, 2020 at 4:28 PM Peter Palaga <ppal...@redhat.com > > > > >>>>> wrote: > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Hi Claus, > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> we have announced a similar move for Camel Quarkus some time > ago. > > >>> We > > >>>>> did > > >>>>>>>> that based on a similar Quarkus announcement [1]. But when I was > > >>>> about > > >>>>>>>> to perform the necessary changes, it turned out that Quarkus got > > >>> some > > >>>>>>>> pushback from the users and thus they abandoned the plan without > > >>>>> letting > > >>>>>>>> us know - see [2]. As a result, Camel Quarkus also had to > revisit > > >>> the > > >>>>>>>> plan. We have decided to make Java 11 our main build and testing > > >>> JDK, > > >>>>>>>> but kept both source and target compatibility at Java 8. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Requiring Java 11+ API on the Camel side would put Camel Quarkus > > >>> in a > > >>>>>>>> bit uncomfortable position: unlike all other extensions offered > > via > > >>>>>>>> code.quarkus.io, our extensions would not work on Java 8 in JVM > > >>>> mode. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> We (Camel community) should figure out how to proceed. > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> The drop of Java 8 is planned for next LTS (Camel 3.7) which is > by > > >>> end > > >>>>>>> of this year. > > >>>>>>> So there is still 6 months to go. In that time Quarkus may get > to a > > >>>>>>> point where they have dropped Java 8 as well. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> But for Camel 3.5 we can surely wait to drop Java 8 so it does > not > > >>>>>>> happen soon on the Camel side. > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> Would ou you go ask the Quarkus team what new timeframe they have > > >>> for > > >>>>>>> dropping Java 8? > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>> Asked > > >>> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/quarkus-dev/7SZAM2BMb9c > > >>>>> > > >>>>> They asked back, what are our motivations for removing Java 8. I > can > > >>> say > > >>>>> for myself that it is mainly a simplification of our testing > matrix. > > >>> Are > > >>>>> there any other reasons? > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Besides they noted that Azure Functions still only supports Java 8. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> -- P > > >>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> [1] > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>> > https://quarkus.io/blog/quarkus-1-4-final-released/#java-8-deprecated > > >>>>>>>> [2] > > >>>>> > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/quarkus-dev/yzEjmYCFbwY/oW64kts3AQAJ > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> Thanks, > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> -- Peter > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> On 26/06/2020 10:23, Claus Ibsen wrote: > > >>>>>>>>> Hi > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Just a heads up that from Camel 3.5 onwards we will drop Java 8 > > >>>>>>>>> support. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> So this means that minimum Java version is now Java 11. > > >>>>>>>>> We are also working on adding support for Java 14, but it may > > >>> take a > > >>>>>>>>> few releases, but its planned for the next LTS 3.7 release to > > have > > >>>>>>>>> both Java 11 and 14 as supported. > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> Camel 3.4.x is the LTS release that supports both Java 8 and > 11, > > >>> and > > >>>>>>>>> its supported for 1-year (june 2022). > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>>> > > >>>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>>> -- > > >>>> ------------------------ > > >>>> Guillaume Nodet > > >>>> > > >>> > > > > >
