Team, I created the following Jira issue to capture the details of this discussion:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-10147 We can continue the discussion on this thread, and include more specific comments on the Jira issue as well. As mentioned in the Jira issue, we should revisit a more definite implementation plan following the release of NiFi 1.17.0. Regards, David Handermann On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 12:31 PM Kevin Doran <kdo...@apache.org> wrote: > Pierre and David, I agree with this project goals: > > > - a 2.x release that drops support for Java 8 (requires at least Java > 11) by EOY > - a 3.x release that drops support for Java 11 (requires at least Java > 17) in the not-to-distant future, perhaps 2023/24 > > > This would also mean we could move some of the original goals of 2.x to > target the 3.x line instead, given the deadlines David identified. > > Kevin > > On Jun 15, 2022 at 13:20:41, David Handermann <exceptionfact...@apache.org > > > wrote: > > > Thanks for the replies Kevin and Pierre! > > > > Various JDK vendors have different timelines for Java 11 support, some > > planning to end active support in September 2023 and others in October > > 2024. Either way, I agree that moving to Java 11 as the minimum version > > should be a shorter duration, with the goal of making Java 17 the minimum > > before too much time elapses. > > > > As far as a general timeline for removing Java 8 support in NiFi, a good > > goal in my mind would be no later than the end of this calendar year, > 2022. > > > > Regards, > > David Handermann > > > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 11:55 AM Pierre Villard < > > pierre.villard...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
