Mark, Randall had pointed me to this thread. I admit to only reading the last couple of dozen posts and, based only on that, share my concerns. I should have spent more time reading the thread, but I was scheduled to do a code walkthrough with my customer and took the 'short' path, for which I apologize.
Your clarification does seem 100% the right thing to do, and I thank you for sharing it. That's worth much more than .02$US! And my customers all never need know I ever had this concern, you had it covered. :-) Bill On Wednesday, August 4, 2021 at 3:49:40 PM UTC-5 Mark Waite wrote: > Thanks for sharing your insights. Great to have participation in the > thread. Comments are inline > > On Wednesday, August 4, 2021 at 2:39:05 PM UTC-6 bhon wrote: > >> Similar to Randall (the.n...), I have customers that use NonStop, but >> they also use various distros of Enterprise Linux. Their corporate >> strategy for software development is to remain on Java 8 for the >> foreseeable future, primarily due to the JDK 11 licensing mentioned >> above. They have a corporate support contract with Oracle to continue to >> get Java 8 updates, so support is not an issue for them. Shipping a >> version of Jenkins that won't do 'remoting' on those target platforms >> should require much longer than 5 months of advance notice, as those >> customers are on much longer strategic cycles. >> >> > I'm not sure where you're getting the idea that we would be shipping a > version of Jenkins that won't do 'remoting' on those target platforms. The > proposal does not remove Java 8 support. The proposal does not prevent > users from running agents or controllers or both with Java 8. The proposal > does not change how 'remoting' operates. > > > >> Even though the newer platforms and releases for NonStop include both >> Java 8 and Java 11, customers on NonStop and Linux that are >> Enterprise-focused (and there are MANY) haven't installed Java 11 and have >> no plan to do so this year or probably even next. What was the >> penetration number above for Java 11, only 4%? Expecting a large >> percentage of your customer base to make this move is short-sighted. >> >> > We're not expecting them to make a move. We're changing the default in > the Jenkins Docker images so that users who choose to use the default > Jenkins Docker images will use Java 11 instead of Java 8. Users that can't > use Docker images (arm32, ppc64, s390x, ia64, riscv) can continue to use > either Java 8 or Java 11 on their platform. After the change, users that > are running Docker images can change the name of the image they are using > and that will allow them to continue running with Java 8. Today, if they > run with `docker run --rm -i -t jenkins/jenkins:lts` and they have a hard > requirement for Java 8, they will need to run with `docker run --rm -i -t > jenkins/jenkins:lts-jdk8`. > > If Jenkins is to retain its preferred position in Enterprise environments, >> this decision should be very carefully reconsidered. Most of your customers >> don't spend time reviewing this group. And many Enterprise decisionmakers >> don't participate in Twitter, which leaves the results of surveys in that >> platform somewhat questionable. This is not just a question of what is >> easier for the developers of Jenkins, it's also a matter of where Jenkins >> (and its remotes) run. >> >> > We're not changing where Jenkins can run with this proposal. > > >> This is just my .02$US, >> >> > Thanks for sharing! > Mark Waite > > >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/1a6e145a-ff6c-42b4-9c32-d915ed1958f5n%40googlegroups.com.
