.
> If it came down to either: > > 1. Support latest 2 LTS JDK on any given C* release, no overlap. > Operators deal with it. > 2. Require 1 overlapping JDK version support on consecutive releases. > Users may have to wait a year for new JDK features > > My opinions… - we shouldn't be getting users to do upgrades that we aren't testing with jvm-dtest-upgrades, - we should recommend operators to upgrade one thing (C* or jdk) at a time, and - make it possible for operators to only upgrade one thing (C* or jdk) at a time. That rules out (1). This isn't saying operators have to upgrade only one thing at a time, just that we recognise it as good operator hygiene, and as a valuable tactic for operators when they do hit bugs. The problem with (2) being only "overlapping JDK version support on consecutive releases" instead of an overlapping JDK over all `N-2` releases is that we say we support upgrade paths that we never test (w/ jvm-dtest-upgrade). Here, I would rather add a third LTS JDK to a release to maintain that `N-2` testing, than to push something untested onto users.
