Oh, if we don't have to drop support for Java 8 then all the better. This will mean that we have to stay away from Java 17+ syntax while we continue to claim Java 8 support though.
What we could do is target a near term 0.8.1 that is the last Java 8 supporting release. There are probably a couple dependency upgrades, critical fixes that we could include there and get that release out. Then it will free up the 0.9.x line for more modern Java features - if that is desirable. On Thu, Oct 9, 2025 at 4:43 AM Arnav Balyan <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks György, > > +1. Thanks for sharing the PR I'll help with validation/documentation, just > let me know wherever you need support. > > I can look into Java 8 deprecation, honestly not sure how long it would > take, can come back with an estimate later this week. If we are > anticipating a quick 0.9.0 release to test release plumbing, it might make > sense to defer it to an upcoming release. I'll check the java 8 deprecation > and get back on an estimate. > > Thanks! > > Arnav > > On Thu, Oct 9, 2025 at 1:34 AM György Gál <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Thank you, Larry, for starting this thread. > > > > I will volunteer as Release Manager, however any help is much appreciated > > because this would be the first time for me. (I did not actively take > part > > in the 0.8.0 release tasks at the time.) > > > > Regarding Java 17 support, I have an open PR at > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-livy/pull/481 . This change does not > > drop support for Java 8, but enables running Livy with both versions. > > (Maybe the deprecation could be done in an upcoming release along with > the > > removal of Spark 2 and Python 2 support and the introduction of Spark 4 > > support). The reason why the unit tests are currently failing on that PR > is > > that the test Docker image does not contain JDK17, it is this change that > > adds it. Please let me know your thoughts on whether Java 17 support > should > > be part of the 0.9.0 release and please feel free to comment on the PR as > > well. > > > > Thanks, > > Gyorgy > > > > On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 1:52 PM Arnav Balyan <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > >> Hi Larry, > >> Thank you so much for initiating this. I can help with documentation and > >> validation for the release if needed. > >> I'd be happy to contribute to the Java 17 support, it looks very > >> promising. > >> > >> - Arnav > >> > >> On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 10:52 PM larry mccay <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > >>> Let's try with the correct dev@ list now! :) > >>> > >>> Livy Devs - > >>> > >>> We have a number of bug fixes, dependency upgrades and a few impactful > >>> features available for an 0.9.0 release. > >>> > >>> I think that we should also consider whether we want to drop support > for > >>> Java 8 in 0.9.0 or whether we want to wait for another iteration like > >>> 0.10.0. Since it is a breaking change, we can't really do it in a dot > >>> release. > >>> > >>> We will need a Release Manager volunteer to run through the process and > >>> potentially work with a previous release manager as needed to help > detail > >>> and document what needs to be done. > >>> > >>> Depending on the discussion for Java 8, we can try and target a release > >>> candidate in a few weeks or a couple months if we are adding Java 17+ > >>> support. > >>> > >>> So, action items: > >>> > >>> 1. Need an RM volunteer - @[email protected] > >>> <[email protected]> are you interested? > >>> 2. Thoughts on Java 8 deprecation in 0.9.0 > >>> 3. Timeline for first release candidate > >>> > >>> > >>> What say, you all? > >>> > >>> thanks, > >>> > >>> —larry > >>> > >>> On Wed, Oct 8, 2025 at 1:17 PM larry mccay <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Livy Devs - > >>>> > >>>> We have a number of bug fixes, dependency upgrades and a few impactful > >>>> features available for an 0.9.0 release. > >>>> > >>>> I think that we should also consider whether we want to drop support > >>>> for Java 8 in 0.9.0 or whether we want to wait for another iteration > like > >>>> 0.10.0. Since it is a breaking change, we can't really do it in a dot > >>>> release. > >>>> > >>>> We will need a Release Manager volunteer to run through the process > and > >>>> potentially work with a previous release manager as needed to help > detail > >>>> and document what needs to be done. > >>>> > >>>> Depending on the discussion for Java 8, we can try and target a > release > >>>> candidate in a few weeks or a couple months if we are adding Java 17+ > >>>> support. > >>>> > >>>> So, action items: > >>>> > >>>> 1. Need an RM volunteer - @[email protected] > >>>> <[email protected]> are you interested? > >>>> 2. Thoughts on Java 8 deprecation in 0.9.0 > >>>> 3. Timeline for first release candidate > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> What say, you all? > >>>> > >>>> thanks, > >>>> > >>>> —larry > >>>> > >>> >
