Re: Java > 8 support

@Reuven: bytebuddy by itself no but the way beam tries to inject the proxy class is. There are other strategies you can use in bytebuddy which work. Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog

Re: Java > 8 support

Hi, I mean that some IO dependency, especially for the tests should be updated for the build with J9. The runtime should work with J9, but not the build. Regards JB On 06/10/2018 17:45, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > I dont think so JB - until you want to use jlink but it is out of scope > of

Re: Java > 8 support

Romain, do you have any more details on the ByteBuddy incompatibility? Is ByteBuddy incompatible with the Java 11 JRE, or just with new language features? On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 10:20 AM Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > Hi Arif, > > AFAIK bytebuddy code is not java 11 friendly otherwise it runs (but

Re: Java > 8 support

I dont think so JB - until you want to use jlink but it is out of scope of beam - and since j9 didnt break unsafe it should work. Le sam. 6 oct. 2018 17:23, Jean-Baptiste Onofré a écrit : > Same thing, it requires some change in the dependency, especially for > the Jigsaw modules. > > Regards >

Re: Java > 8 support

Same thing, it requires some change in the dependency, especially for the Jigsaw modules. Regards JB On 06/10/2018 15:01, Arif Kasim wrote: > Thanks all. What about Java 9 support? > > > > > > > > > > *  •  **Arif Kasim** > **  • * Strategic Cloud

Re: Is there any way to ask the runner to call finalizeCheckpoint() method before it closed the Reader?

Got it, thanks, will double check the PubsubUnboundedSource. btw, I'd like to learn more about the lifecycle of IO connector(for example, when will the runner call the reader's close() method?), could you recommend some documents, thanks! On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 11:01 PM Maximilian Michels

Re: Java > 8 support

Thanks all. What about Java 9 support? * • **Arif Kasim* * • * Strategic Cloud Engineer * • *Google, Inc. • arifka...@google.com On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 7:20 PM Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > Hi Arif, > > AFAIK bytebuddy code is not java 11 friendly otherwise it runs (but it > means

Re: Beam website sources migrated to apache/beam

This is great news! Many thanks to all who contributed to this! I believe that as the process of website update will be clearer and simpler, as our documentation will be up-to-date. > On 6 Oct 2018, at 06:38, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote: > > Awesome, > > thanks for the move Scott ! > >

Re: python post-commit failures

My changes to the Python option parsing broke the PostCommit. PreCommit passed, as well as the Portable Runner tests. Sorry about that. +1 It would be great to have some more basic integration tests in the PreCommit. That will give us more confidence before merge without always running the