I'd even love to go straight to Java 17 since it's the new LTS version... but this may be quite a big jump for our community and users. I guess we can envision a "short" 2.x release line and consider Java 17 for 3.x. Definitely approve the proposal!
Le mer. 15 juin 2022 à 18:50, Kevin Doran <kdo...@apache.org> a écrit : > Thanks for reviving this discussion David. In light of those core > dependencies dropping support for Java 8, this plan seems necessary for > NiFi. I support the proposal. > > Thanks, > Kevin > > On Jun 15, 2022 at 11:48:05, David Handermann <exceptionfact...@apache.org > > > wrote: > > > Team, > > > > With multiple major projects in the process of sunsetting support for > Java > > 8, we should also prepare a timeline for removing Java 8 support from > > Apache NiFi and subprojects. > > > > BACKGROUND > > > > The Jetty project announced the end of community support for version 9 as > > of 2022-06-01 [1]. Although Jetty 9 is not end of life in terms of > security > > updates, this is an important milestone as both NiFi and NiFi Registry > > leverage Jetty for the web application container. Jetty 10 requires Java > 11 > > as the minimum version. > > > > The next major release of the Spring Framework will drop support for both > > Java 8 and 11, requiring Java 17 as the minimum version [2]. Other > > supporting components, such as OpenSAML, which enables SAML 2 > integration, > > dropped support for Java 8 in OpenSAML 4 [3]. > > > > In order to continue maintaining a secure product, NiFi will also need to > > remove Java 8 support so that we can track dependency upgrades. > > > > NEXT STEPS > > > > In light of widespread deployment of Apache NiFi and subprojects, we need > > to prepare a timeline for transition. Although there have been various > > discussions on what should be included in the next major release, > narrowing > > the focus to simply removing support for Java 8 provides the simplest > path > > forward. > > > > Announcing removal of support for Java 8 should incorporate a reasonable > > amount of time for potential transition. NiFi has supported Java 11 for > > multiple releases, and NiFi 1.16.0 included basic support for Java 17. > > > > At minimum, it seems best to proceed with a release for NiFi 1.17.0, when > > ready, without making any changes. At that time, we should also have a > > timeline for removing Java 8 support. It may be worthwhile to plan on at > > least one more minor release that incorporates deprecation warnings where > > necessary. > > > > Following a selected minor release version, a support branch for major > > version 1 could be created, as a means of providing critical security and > > functional fixes. With a support branch created, main development could > be > > transitioned to 2.0.0-SNAPSHOT. I defer to Joe Witt as the release > manager > > for more thought around these particular details. > > > > Please provide your thoughts on the general process, and highlight > > particular areas of concern. > > > > Regards, > > David Handermann > > > > [1] https://github.com/eclipse/jetty.project/issues/7958 > > [2] > > > > > https://spring.io/blog/2021/09/02/a-java-17-and-jakarta-ee-9-baseline-for-spring-framework-6 > > [3] https://shibboleth.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/OSAML/overview > > >
