Need a little clarification on something: > 2) always release cassandra on a LTS version combined with: > 3) keep trunk on the lasest jdk version, assumming we release a major > cassandra version close enough to a LTS release.
Wouldn't that potentially leave us in a situation where we're ready for a C* release but blocked waiting on a new LTS cut? For example, if JDK 9 were the currently supported LTS and trunk was on JDK 11, we'd either have to get trunk to work with 9 or wait for 11 to resolve that. On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 9:32 AM, Jason Brown <jasedbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > > TL;DR Oracle has started revving the JDK version much faster, and we need > an agreed upon plan. > > Well, we probably should has this discussion this already by now, but here > we are. Oracle announced plans to release updated JDK version every six > months, and each new version immediate supercedes the previous in all ways: > no updates/security fixes to previous versions is the main thing, and > previous versions are EOL'd immediately. In addition, Oracle has planned > parallel LTS versions that will live for three years, and then superceded > by the next LTS; but not immediately EOL'd from what I can tell. Please see > [1, 2] for Oracle's offical comments about this change ([3] was > particularly useful, imo), [4] and many other postings on the internet for > discussion/commentary. > > We have a jira [5] where Robert Stupp did most of the work to get us onto > Java 9 (thanks, Robert), but then the announcement of the JDK version > changes happened last fall after Robert had done much of the work on the > ticket. > > Here's an initial proposal of how to move forward. I don't suspect it's > complete, but a decent place to start a conversation. > > 1) receommend OracleJDK over OpenJDK. IIUC from [3], the OpenJDK will > release every six months, and the OracleJDK will release every three years. > Thus, the OracleJDK is the LTS version, and it just comes from a snapshot > of one of those OpenJDK builds. > > 2) always release cassandra on a LTS version. I don't think we can > reasonably expect operators to update the JDK every six months, on time. > Further, if there are breaking changes to the JDK, we don't want to have to > update established c* versions due to those changes, every six months. > > 3) keep trunk on the lasest jdk version, assumming we release a major > cassandra version close enough to a LTS release. Currently that seems > reasonable for cassandra 4.0 to be released with java 11 (18.9 LTS) > support. Perhaps we can evaluate this over time. > > > Once we agree on a path forward, *it is impreative that we publish the > decision to the docs* so we can point contributors and operators there, > instead of rehashing the same conversation. > > I look forward to a lively discussion. Thanks! > > -Jason > > [1] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html > [2] > https://blogs.oracle.com/java-platform-group/faster-and-easier-use-and-redistribution-of-java-se > [3] > https://www.oracle.com/java/java9-screencasts.html?bcid=5582439790001&playerType=single-social&size=events > [4] > http://blog.joda.org/2018/02/java-9-has-six-weeks-to-live.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+StephenColebournesBlog+%28Stephen+Colebourne%27s+blog%29 > [5] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-9608 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
