I agree that dropping Java 8 should happen after we have released
new features like geometry and variant types. It would be good to
set the expectation of future releases (even without precise date)
so they can be planned. For example:

- Release 1.16.0 for geometry and variant initial implementations.
- Release 1.17.0 as the last 1.x release to finalize these implementations.
- Release 2.0.0 with planned tasks including Java 11 support and deprecated
API cleanup.

Best,
Gang

On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 11:11 PM Fokko Driesprong <fo...@apache.org> wrote:

> Hey Eugene, Gang,
>
> Thanks for bringing this up.
>
> Should we create an issue targeting milestone 2.0
> <https://github.com/apache/parquet-java/milestone/27>? We've taken the
> first steps to drop Java 8, like Hadoop 2.x. I think with the new types
> like Variant and Geo coming up, I think it is reasonable to make sure that
> we also release these features to the audience that's still on Java 8.
>
> Kind regards,
> Fokko
>
> Op wo 19 mrt 2025 om 02:28 schreef Gang Wu <ust...@gmail.com>:
>
> > Thanks for bringing this up!
> >
> > I think this requires a major version bump which has been discussed at
> [1].
> > According to our release cadence [2], should we plan a parquet-java 2.0.0
> > release with action items like dropping Java 8 support?
> >
> > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/kttwbl5l7opz6nwb5bck2gghc2y3td0o
> > [2]
> >
> >
> https://parquet.apache.org/docs/contribution-guidelines/releasing/#release-cadence
> >
> > Best,
> > Gang
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 19, 2025 at 8:03 AM Eugene Shvartsman <code...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Our team is looking for a resolution on
> > > https://github.com/apache/parquet-java/pull/1308
> > >
> > > The issue with the build appears to be that parquet-java is build on
> Java
> > > 8 while the new protobuf library is built on Java 11. `wgtmac`
> mentioned
> > > that I should reach out to this dev group for a wider audience.
> > >
> > > Are there any plans in motion to upgrade to Java 11?
> > >
> > > Thank you,
> > > Eugene Shvartsman
> > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to