Re: [DISCUSS] strategy on Java versions

bq. Dropping all but LTS on major version +1 to the above initiative. On Thu, Mar 8, 2018 at 8:37 AM, Josh Elser wrote: > Oof, more to do, but I think the list you put together is a good plan to > start. Dropping all but LTS on major version sounds good as well. > > Thanks

Re: [DISCUSS] strategy on Java versions

Oof, more to do, but I think the list you put together is a good plan to start. Dropping all but LTS on major version sounds good as well. Thanks for thinking about this already. On 3/6/18 12:20 PM, Sean Busbey wrote: Hi folks! Our ref guide section on Java versions[1] is starting to look

Re: [DISCUSS] strategy on Java versions

> -- "Recommended" for running > > I think we should suggest folks rely on LTS releases of Java, wether > from the OpenJDK project (which looks like it will be equivalent to > the Oracle version) or a vender. > > That would mean updating our support matrix to call out Java 9 and > Java 10 as "Not

[DISCUSS] strategy on Java versions

Hi folks! Our ref guide section on Java versions[1] is starting to look dated, because the Oracle version of Java 9 hits end of public updates this month and we don't mention it at all. I'd like to discuss how we want to approach keeping HBase up-to-date on new Java versions. As background, the