Looking in the build log, I see this Loading trusted files from base branch 3.9 at 90ee2d2b3499b7e1eff99bc63bf66aba9d7ff99c rather than f4cd8d5d664a62b280c0d2ea1bc731069443ba87 Obtained Jenkinsfile from 90ee2d2b3499b7e1eff99bc63bf66aba9d7ff99c ‘Jenkinsfile’ has been modified in an untrusted revision
Going by an older blogpost at https://www.jenkins.io/blog/2022/12/14/require-java-11/, this means that Jenkins will only test Jenkinsfile changes in PRs submitted by people with repo write access. I've run the tests for the https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19311 branch locally, and they pass. So maybe the easiest path forward is to review (and ideally merge) the following PRs https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19307 https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19308 https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19309 https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19310 https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19221 https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19365 https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19367 (note that this upgrades to the same Mockito version as used on trunk, while the WIP PR used the latest Mockito. I don't think it should make a difference, but it seemed weird to let 3.9 get ahead of the version trunk uses) which are the component parts of that branch, except for the Jenkinsfile update. Once these are merged, a committer can do a PR to update the Jenkinsfile to build on Java 23 as well. Den ons. 2. apr. 2025 kl. 17.06 skrev Stig Rohde Døssing < stigdoess...@gmail.com>: > Hi Luke, > > I took a look at getting 3.9 to run Java 23 on CI in this PR > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19311 which is just 3.9 plus all the > other backport PRs, plus a few extra backports and changes to get Java 23 > to build locally. I was planning to raise PRs for these bits individually > once I had a build working. > > But I am roadblocked on getting Jenkins to actually use Java 23. The CI > run appears to not have picked up the change (see > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19311/files#diff-e6ffa5dc854b843b3ee3c3c28f8eae2f436c2df2b1ca299cca1fa5982e390cf8) > to the script I did in the last commit. I'm not familiar enough with 3.9's > CI setup to know how to fix it, and I also don't think I have the necessary > access to Jenkins to go dig into the job configuration to figure it out. > > In particular I don't know if > > tools { > jdk 'jdk_23_latest' > } > > is right, because I don't know which JDKs are available on Jenkins, and > without admin access, I don't believe I can get a list anywhere. > > If someone has full access to Jenkins, maybe they can take a look? > > Den ons. 2. apr. 2025 kl. 14.04 skrev Dejan Stojadinović < > dejan2...@gmail.com>: > >> Hi all, >> >> Just keep in mind that *Gradle version 8.14 *(currently under development) >> will support *Java 24*: >> >> - https://docs.gradle.org/8.13/userguide/compatibility.html >> - >> https://github.com/gradle/gradle/issues/32290#issuecomment-2741096604 >> - >> https://github.com/gradle/gradle/issues/32289#issuecomment-2741056207 >> >> >> >> On Wed, Apr 2, 2025 at 1:25 PM Luke Chen <show...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > Hi Stig and all, >> > >> > For backporting the change to 3.9, if there's no objections, I think we >> can >> > start to merge them tomorrow. >> > For the Java 24 testing, it's fine we ship 3.9 without Java 24 test if >> > gradle release is delayed since this is also the state of what Kafka >> v4.0 >> > is. >> > >> > So we should firstly test Java 23 in CI for 3.9. @Stig, could you help >> open >> > a PR for it? >> > >> > Thanks. >> > Luke >> > >> > On Sat, Mar 29, 2025 at 2:29 AM Stig Rohde Døssing < >> stigdoess...@gmail.com >> > > >> > wrote: >> > >> > > Thanks. I'll wait for that PR then. Since it's blocked by Gradle, and >> the >> > > plan is for Gradle to release a new version on April 7th (see >> > > https://github.com/gradle/gradle/issues/32289#issuecomment-2741056207 >> ), >> > > maybe the way to go is to aim to test with Java 23 on 3.9 for now? >> Once >> > we >> > > can test with Java 24 on trunk, maybe we can consider backporting the >> > > necessary changes to 3.9 to get that branch tested against Java 24 as >> > well, >> > > and getting it running with Java 23 at least gets us closer. >> > > >> > > Regarding CI, I made an attempt at getting Jenkins to run with Java 23 >> > here >> > > >> > > >> > >> https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19311/commits/f4cd8d5d664a62b280c0d2ea1bc731069443ba87 >> > > , >> > > but it doesn't look like CI is picking up the change. Maybe Jenkins is >> > > configured to fetch the script from a specific branch? I can't tell >> > since I >> > > don't have access to the job configurations. >> > > >> > > Den fre. 28. mar. 2025 kl. 19.00 skrev Chia-Ping Tsai < >> > chia7...@gmail.com >> > > >: >> > > >> > > > hi Stig >> > > > >> > > > > Does anyone know where the corresponding CI script >> > > > files are located in 3.9? >> > > > >> > > > https://github.com/apache/kafka/blob/3.9/Jenkinsfile#L165 >> > > > >> > > > > I noticed that trunk isn't currently testing against Java 24. I'll >> > try >> > > to >> > > > make a PR to fix that, which will probably require another bump of >> > > > Spotbugs, which may prompt another backport PR. >> > > > >> > > > there is already a PR (https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19235) >> > > > >> > > > Best, >> > > > Chia-Ping >> > > > >> > > > Stig Rohde Døssing <stigdoess...@gmail.com> 於 2025年3月29日 週六 >> 上午12:02寫道： >> > > > >> > > > > Chia-Ping, I think we should aim for Java 24 support, since 23 >> > reaches >> > > > end >> > > > > of life in a month or so. >> > > > > >> > > > > Here are PRs for 4 of the changes linked at >> > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-17638 >> > > > > >> > > > > Scala upgrade https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19307 >> > > > > Compiler warning 1 https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19308 >> > > > > Compiler warning 2 https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19309 >> > > > > Spotbugs update https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19310 >> > > > > >> > > > > The missing backports after that will be >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/17409 and >> > > > > https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/17403 >> > > > > >> > > > > For the former PR, it cherry picks mostly cleanly, but it won't >> pass >> > > > tests >> > > > > until the other changes are merged. The CI script changes are >> done to >> > > > files >> > > > > that don't exist in 3.9. Does anyone know where the corresponding >> CI >> > > > script >> > > > > files are located in 3.9? >> > > > > >> > > > > The latter PR contains only documentation changes calling out that >> > Java >> > > > 23 >> > > > > is now supported. I think we are better off adjusting the docs on >> > trunk >> > > > to >> > > > > say that Java 24 is supported as of 3.9.1 instead of backporting >> that >> > > > > change. >> > > > > >> > > > > I noticed that trunk isn't currently testing against Java 24. I'll >> > try >> > > to >> > > > > make a PR to fix that, which will probably require another bump of >> > > > > Spotbugs, which may prompt another backport PR. >> > > > > >> > > > > Den fre. 28. mar. 2025 kl. 15.08 skrev Chia-Ping Tsai < >> > > > chia7...@gmail.com >> > > > > >: >> > > > > >> > > > > > hi Stig >> > > > > > >> > > > > > We should run CI under Java 23 if we want to make 3.9 support >> Java >> > 23 >> > > > > > officially, so +1 to backport them >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Best, >> > > > > > Chia-Ping >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > Mickael Maison <mickael.mai...@gmail.com> 於 2025年3月28日 下午6:43 >> > 寫道： >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Hi, >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I'm also supportive of backporting this change to the 3.9 >> branch. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > > > Mickael >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> On Fri, Mar 28, 2025 at 10:16 AM Stig Rohde Døssing >> > > > > > >> <stigdoess...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> Pulling in a discussion from the PR thread: >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >>> There were other PRs that were part of Java 23 support >> > generally, >> > > > > > should >> > > > > > >> these also be backported? >> > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-17638 >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> Greg, thanks for letting me know about these, I was not >> aware. >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> I think most likely these changes aren't necessary to allow >> > Kafka >> > > to >> > > > > > run on >> > > > > > >> Java 23. I believe upgrading Scala is necessary because the >> > > bundled >> > > > > ASM >> > > > > > >> doesn't understand Java 23 bytecode, and the remaining >> changes >> > > seem >> > > > to >> > > > > > >> relate to either fixing compiler warnings or adding Java 23 >> to >> > the >> > > > > build >> > > > > > >> matrix. I think backporting these would be a fine idea, but I >> > > don't >> > > > > > think >> > > > > > >> they're blockers for using Kafka on Java 23 or 24. >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> I'm happy to open PRs to backport these as well (though for >> the >> > > > build >> > > > > > >> matrix, we should use Java 24 now), assuming there's no >> strong >> > > > > > opposition >> > > > > > >> to that? >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >> Den fre. 28. mar. 2025 kl. 05.02 skrev Greg Harris >> > > > > > >> <greg.har...@aiven.io.invalid>: >> > > > > > >> >> > > > > > >>> Hi All, >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> I am still strongly in support of backporting this patch as >> I >> > > > stated >> > > > > > in the >> > > > > > >>> earlier discussion thread. >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> Thank you Stig, Anton, Danish, Mateusz, Manfred, Monica, >> > Istvan, >> > > > > > Vincent, >> > > > > > >>> Clement, Anshu, Foivos, Drakgoku, Severin, Ozan, Georgios, >> and >> > > > > > Guillaume, >> > > > > > >>> members of our extended community who have commented to >> discuss >> > > the >> > > > > > >>> impact and their support for this patch. >> > > > > > >>> I inevitably missed some people, such as everyone who has >> been >> > > > > > encountering >> > > > > > >>> and silently working around the problem just from reading >> these >> > > > > > threads and >> > > > > > >>> GitHub issues. >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> Through our inaction, we have obligated several users to >> take >> > > > actions >> > > > > > to >> > > > > > >>> work around us: >> > > > > > >>> * The Trino project dropped two of their products [1, 2] >> > > > > > >>> * The Quarkus project disabled some tests [3] >> > > > > > >>> * Quarkus project users downgraded their java version [4] >> > > > > > >>> * Spring Boot users have installed the system property >> > workaround >> > > > [5] >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> In my opinion this is unacceptable, and it's time for us to >> fix >> > > > this. >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> Thank you Stig for restarting the conversation! >> > > > > > >>> Greg >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> [1] https://github.com/trinodb/trino/issues/24419 >> > > > > > >>> [2] https://github.com/trinodb/trino/issues/24417 >> > > > > > >>> [3] https://github.com/quarkusio/quarkus/pull/43543 >> > > > > > >>> [4] >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> https://github.com/anshupitlia/product-information-system/commit/2c3a8dbd974dce0273f74969ec64b661abafef62 >> > > > > > >>> [5] >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> https://github.com/vividus-framework/vividus-build-system/commit/53b7016a0d3b0ba04a23b4b1892e1cf7f62ba0a5 >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>>> On Thu, Mar 27, 2025 at 7:39 PM Luke Chen < >> show...@gmail.com> >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >>>> Hi Stig, >> > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > >>>> Thanks for bringing this to us. >> > > > > > >>>> I'm +1 for backporting to 3.9 branch since there's no >> > workaround >> > > > for >> > > > > > Java >> > > > > > >>>> 24. >> > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > >>>> Thanks. >> > > > > > >>>> Luke >> > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > >>>> On Tue, Mar 18, 2025 at 1:14 AM Stig Rohde Døssing < >> > > > > > >>> stigdoess...@gmail.com >> > > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > > >>>> wrote: >> > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > >>>>> Thanks Ismail, >> > > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>> I've opened https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/19221 >> just >> > to >> > > > get >> > > > > > any >> > > > > > >>>>> test >> > > > > > >>>>> failures out of the way in case it is decided to do this >> > > > backport. >> > > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>> I'm hoping people will weigh in with their concerns in >> this >> > > > thread >> > > > > if >> > > > > > >>>> they >> > > > > > >>>>> don't like the idea of backporting this change. >> > > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>> Den man. 17. mar. 2025 kl. 16.43 skrev Ismael Juma < >> > > > > > m...@ismaeljuma.com >> > > > > > >>>> : >> > > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> Hi Stig, >> > > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> Kafka 4.0 is likely to be released in a day or two. Even >> > so, I >> > > > > think >> > > > > > >>> it >> > > > > > >>>>>> makes sense to revive the backporting thread given the >> lack >> > of >> > > > > > >>>> workaround >> > > > > > >>>>>> for Java 24. >> > > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> Ismael >> > > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> On Mon, Mar 17, 2025 at 7:44 AM Stig Rohde Døssing < >> > > > > > >>>>> stigdoess...@gmail.com >> > > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> wrote: >> > > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>> Hi, >> > > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>> Some months ago, a reflective shim was added in >> > > > > > >>>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-17078, in >> > order >> > > to >> > > > > > >>>> support >> > > > > > >>>>>>> running Kafka with SASL on JDKs that no longer support >> the >> > > > > security >> > > > > > >>>>>>> manager. >> > > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>> This shim was added only to Kafka 4.0, but backporting >> was >> > > > > > >>> discussed >> > > > > > >>>> in >> > > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/vl43q9wqq4xs67xx61f0t0850y2b037o >> > > > > . >> > > > > > >>>>> There >> > > > > > >>>>>>> was >> > > > > > >>>>>>> no clear consensus for or against backporting, but it >> ended >> > > up >> > > > > not >> > > > > > >>>>>>> happening. At the time, users could work around the >> issue >> > by >> > > > > > >>> enabling >> > > > > > >>>>> the >> > > > > > >>>>>>> Security Manager again via a command-line flag. >> > > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>> Java 24, which is planned to release tomorrow, no longer >> > has >> > > > this >> > > > > > >>>>>>> workaround available. >> > > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>> This leaves users running Java 23 (I am one) in a >> slightly >> > > > > > >>>>> uncomfortable >> > > > > > >>>>>>> spot. >> > > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>> If Kafka releases 4.0 in the next month, we can rush to >> > > upgrade >> > > > > to >> > > > > > >>>>> that, >> > > > > > >>>>>>> and hope that the first release has no regressions. >> > > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>> Otherwise, we will need to downgrade back to Java 21, >> since >> > > > > staying >> > > > > > >>>> on >> > > > > > >>>>> 23 >> > > > > > >>>>>>> isn't a good idea past Oracle's quarterly security >> update >> > in >> > > > > April >> > > > > > >>>> (see >> > > > > > >>>>>>> https://www.oracle.com/security-alerts/), which will >> > include >> > > > > > >>> patches >> > > > > > >>>>>> that >> > > > > > >>>>>>> won't be released for Java 23. >> > > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>>> Would there be strong objections to attempting a >> backport >> > of >> > > > this >> > > > > > >>>> shim >> > > > > > >>>>>> to a >> > > > > > >>>>>>> 3.9.x release? >> > > > > > >>>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>>> >> > > > > > >>>>> >> > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> >
