Re: [VOTE] Master/9.0 to require Java 11
This vote has passed. I opened https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-8738. Thanks all. On Mon, Mar 25, 2019 at 1:27 AM Varun Thacker wrote: > > +1 > > On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 9:47 AM David Smiley wrote: >> >> +1 -- great point about Lucene/Solr's next major release being a ways off; >> this makes the decision pretty easy. >> >> ~ David Smiley >> Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer >> http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley >> >> >> On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 2:23 PM Adrien Grand wrote: >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> Now that Lucene/Solr 8.0 has shipped I'd like us to consider requiring >>> Java 11 for 9.0, currently the master branch. We had 18 months between >>> 7.0 and 8.0, so if we assume a similar interval between 8.0 and 9.0 >>> that would mean releasing 9.0 about 2 years after Java 11, which >>> sounds like a conservative requirement to me. >>> >>> What do you think? >>> >>> Here is my +1. >>> >>> -- >>> Adrien >>> >>> - >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >>> -- Adrien - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Master/9.0 to require Java 11
+1 On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 9:47 AM David Smiley wrote: > +1 -- great point about Lucene/Solr's next major release being a ways off; > this makes the decision pretty easy. > > ~ David Smiley > Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer > http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley > > > On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 2:23 PM Adrien Grand wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> Now that Lucene/Solr 8.0 has shipped I'd like us to consider requiring >> Java 11 for 9.0, currently the master branch. We had 18 months between >> 7.0 and 8.0, so if we assume a similar interval between 8.0 and 9.0 >> that would mean releasing 9.0 about 2 years after Java 11, which >> sounds like a conservative requirement to me. >> >> What do you think? >> >> Here is my +1. >> >> -- >> Adrien >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >> >>
Re: [VOTE] Master/9.0 to require Java 11
+1 -- great point about Lucene/Solr's next major release being a ways off; this makes the decision pretty easy. ~ David Smiley Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 2:23 PM Adrien Grand wrote: > Hello, > > Now that Lucene/Solr 8.0 has shipped I'd like us to consider requiring > Java 11 for 9.0, currently the master branch. We had 18 months between > 7.0 and 8.0, so if we assume a similar interval between 8.0 and 9.0 > that would mean releasing 9.0 about 2 years after Java 11, which > sounds like a conservative requirement to me. > > What do you think? > > Here is my +1. > > -- > Adrien > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
Re: [VOTE] Master/9.0 to require Java 11
+1. It’s really the same argument as always, right? We can’t stay on the same version forever. It’s a little embarrassing to be on something that’s EOL. Ignoring the Oracke/OpenJDK question. Speaking of which, I’m still looking for responses to “what versions of Java from what organization does the community recommend”, see SOLR-12809 > On Mar 20, 2019, at 8:16 AM, Robert Muir wrote: > > +1 and thanks for cleaning this up Uwe. > > the MR-JAR can be a good solution to use newer methods where available > in specific cases, but it does not solve everything. We should allow > opportunities in master branch such as potentially restructuring code > to take advantage of the new module system and so on, which could > drastically improve usability. > > On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 5:01 PM Uwe Schindler wrote: >> >> +1, let's do it. >> >> I can take care of commenting out the MR-JAR parts and migrating from >> lucene.Future* to java.util.* (but we should not remove it from build >> files, so we can use MR-JARS in the same way in future). >> >> Just open an issue once the vote has passed, I'l take care of removing the >> Future* classes. >> >> Uwe >> >> - >> Uwe Schindler >> Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen >> http://www.thetaphi.de >> eMail: u...@thetaphi.de >> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: Adrien Grand >>> Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 7:23 PM >>> To: Lucene Dev >>> Subject: [VOTE] Master/9.0 to require Java 11 >>> >>> Hello, >>> >>> Now that Lucene/Solr 8.0 has shipped I'd like us to consider requiring >>> Java 11 for 9.0, currently the master branch. We had 18 months between >>> 7.0 and 8.0, so if we assume a similar interval between 8.0 and 9.0 >>> that would mean releasing 9.0 about 2 years after Java 11, which >>> sounds like a conservative requirement to me. >>> >>> What do you think? >>> >>> Here is my +1. >>> >>> -- >>> Adrien >>> >>> - >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >> >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >> > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Master/9.0 to require Java 11
+1 and thanks for cleaning this up Uwe. the MR-JAR can be a good solution to use newer methods where available in specific cases, but it does not solve everything. We should allow opportunities in master branch such as potentially restructuring code to take advantage of the new module system and so on, which could drastically improve usability. On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 5:01 PM Uwe Schindler wrote: > > +1, let's do it. > > I can take care of commenting out the MR-JAR parts and migrating from > lucene.Future* to java.util.* (but we should not remove it from build files, > so we can use MR-JARS in the same way in future). > > Just open an issue once the vote has passed, I'l take care of removing the > Future* classes. > > Uwe > > - > Uwe Schindler > Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen > http://www.thetaphi.de > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > > > -Original Message- > > From: Adrien Grand > > Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 7:23 PM > > To: Lucene Dev > > Subject: [VOTE] Master/9.0 to require Java 11 > > > > Hello, > > > > Now that Lucene/Solr 8.0 has shipped I'd like us to consider requiring > > Java 11 for 9.0, currently the master branch. We had 18 months between > > 7.0 and 8.0, so if we assume a similar interval between 8.0 and 9.0 > > that would mean releasing 9.0 about 2 years after Java 11, which > > sounds like a conservative requirement to me. > > > > What do you think? > > > > Here is my +1. > > > > -- > > Adrien > > > > - > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Master/9.0 to require Java 11
+1 Mike McCandless http://blog.mikemccandless.com On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 2:23 PM Adrien Grand wrote: > Hello, > > Now that Lucene/Solr 8.0 has shipped I'd like us to consider requiring > Java 11 for 9.0, currently the master branch. We had 18 months between > 7.0 and 8.0, so if we assume a similar interval between 8.0 and 9.0 > that would mean releasing 9.0 about 2 years after Java 11, which > sounds like a conservative requirement to me. > > What do you think? > > Here is my +1. > > -- > Adrien > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > >
Re: [VOTE] Master/9.0 to require Java 11
+1 - Java 8 EOLed last year - moving on in 2020 is reasonable and it's our responsibility to move with the platform we are running on. simon On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 9:27 AM Jan Høydahl wrote: > +1 > > -- > Jan Høydahl, search solution architect > Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com > > 19. mar. 2019 kl. 19:22 skrev Adrien Grand : > > Hello, > > Now that Lucene/Solr 8.0 has shipped I'd like us to consider requiring > Java 11 for 9.0, currently the master branch. We had 18 months between > 7.0 and 8.0, so if we assume a similar interval between 8.0 and 9.0 > that would mean releasing 9.0 about 2 years after Java 11, which > sounds like a conservative requirement to me. > > What do you think? > > Here is my +1. > > -- > Adrien > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > > >
Re: [VOTE] Master/9.0 to require Java 11
+1 -- Jan Høydahl, search solution architect Cominvent AS - www.cominvent.com > 19. mar. 2019 kl. 19:22 skrev Adrien Grand : > > Hello, > > Now that Lucene/Solr 8.0 has shipped I'd like us to consider requiring > Java 11 for 9.0, currently the master branch. We had 18 months between > 7.0 and 8.0, so if we assume a similar interval between 8.0 and 9.0 > that would mean releasing 9.0 about 2 years after Java 11, which > sounds like a conservative requirement to me. > > What do you think? > > Here is my +1. > > -- > Adrien > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org >
Re: [VOTE] Master/9.0 to require Java 11
Hi Shawn, If I ask the question the other way around: what does it buy us to keep Java 8 as a minimum version requirement for Lucene/Solr 9.0? This would only be helpful to users who can afford to upgrade to the latest Lucene/Solr release but can't use a JDK version that will be about 2 years old at that time. This case doesn't sound strong enough to me to keep supporting Java 8. There are things that Java 11 is going to help with, but this is almost irrelevant to me: if we can raise the minimum version requirement to a version that is expected to be widely deployed at the time of the release then we should do it. Just because it makes things easier to reason about and to test. And then doing it early gives us time to see how we can use new Java features to make Lucene/Solr better. On Wed, Mar 20, 2019 at 1:49 AM Shawn Heisey wrote: > > On 3/19/2019 12:22 PM, Adrien Grand wrote: > > Now that Lucene/Solr 8.0 has shipped I'd like us to consider requiring > > Java 11 for 9.0, currently the master branch. We had 18 months between > > 7.0 and 8.0, so if we assume a similar interval between 8.0 and 9.0 > > that would mean releasing 9.0 about 2 years after Java 11, which > > sounds like a conservative requirement to me. > > What advantages to we get as developers with Java 11? I haven't been > following the advancements and don't know anything about what's new. I > knew a little bit of what Java 8 provided over Java 7, so I was more > informed the last time we did this. > > I see a short list of possible reasons we might want to adjust the minimum: > > 1) Java 11 makes life significantly better for us (committers, > contributors, casual code watchers) or significantly improves the user > experience at runtime. > 2) Achieving compatibility with 11 breaks compat with Java 8. > 3) If a functional OpenJDK 8 becomes significantly difficult to obtain. > 4) If it becomes difficult to produce binaries compatible with 8. > 5) Our dependencies increase their minimum Java version. > > If none of those applies, then continuing to provide compatibility with > Java 8 seems like a good idea. > > It does seem likely that at least one of the things in the list above > will occur in the next year or two ... and if it does, then I would be > all for it. > > Thanks, > Shawn > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > -- Adrien - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Master/9.0 to require Java 11
On 3/19/2019 12:22 PM, Adrien Grand wrote: Now that Lucene/Solr 8.0 has shipped I'd like us to consider requiring Java 11 for 9.0, currently the master branch. We had 18 months between 7.0 and 8.0, so if we assume a similar interval between 8.0 and 9.0 that would mean releasing 9.0 about 2 years after Java 11, which sounds like a conservative requirement to me. What advantages to we get as developers with Java 11? I haven't been following the advancements and don't know anything about what's new. I knew a little bit of what Java 8 provided over Java 7, so I was more informed the last time we did this. I see a short list of possible reasons we might want to adjust the minimum: 1) Java 11 makes life significantly better for us (committers, contributors, casual code watchers) or significantly improves the user experience at runtime. 2) Achieving compatibility with 11 breaks compat with Java 8. 3) If a functional OpenJDK 8 becomes significantly difficult to obtain. 4) If it becomes difficult to produce binaries compatible with 8. 5) Our dependencies increase their minimum Java version. If none of those applies, then continuing to provide compatibility with Java 8 seems like a good idea. It does seem likely that at least one of the things in the list above will occur in the next year or two ... and if it does, then I would be all for it. Thanks, Shawn - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Master/9.0 to require Java 11
+1 On Tue, Mar 19, 2019 at 11:53 PM Adrien Grand wrote: > Hello, > > Now that Lucene/Solr 8.0 has shipped I'd like us to consider requiring > Java 11 for 9.0, currently the master branch. We had 18 months between > 7.0 and 8.0, so if we assume a similar interval between 8.0 and 9.0 > that would mean releasing 9.0 about 2 years after Java 11, which > sounds like a conservative requirement to me. > > What do you think? > > Here is my +1. > > -- > Adrien > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > -- Regards, Shalin Shekhar Mangar.
Re: [VOTE] Master/9.0 to require Java 11
I’d like to ask people to comment on SOLR-12809 (actually, maybe it should be a Lucene JIRA). It’s related in that we are getting more and more questions about whether Solr/Lucene version X works with Java Y…. We need to have a consistent story, inquiring minds want to know…. > On Mar 19, 2019, at 2:01 PM, Uwe Schindler wrote: > > +1, let's do it. > > I can take care of commenting out the MR-JAR parts and migrating from > lucene.Future* to java.util.* (but we should not remove it from build files, > so we can use MR-JARS in the same way in future). > > Just open an issue once the vote has passed, I'l take care of removing the > Future* classes. > > Uwe > > - > Uwe Schindler > Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen > http://www.thetaphi.de > eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > >> -Original Message- >> From: Adrien Grand >> Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 7:23 PM >> To: Lucene Dev >> Subject: [VOTE] Master/9.0 to require Java 11 >> >> Hello, >> >> Now that Lucene/Solr 8.0 has shipped I'd like us to consider requiring >> Java 11 for 9.0, currently the master branch. We had 18 months between >> 7.0 and 8.0, so if we assume a similar interval between 8.0 and 9.0 >> that would mean releasing 9.0 about 2 years after Java 11, which >> sounds like a conservative requirement to me. >> >> What do you think? >> >> Here is my +1. >> >> -- >> Adrien >> >> - >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
RE: [VOTE] Master/9.0 to require Java 11
+1, let's do it. I can take care of commenting out the MR-JAR parts and migrating from lucene.Future* to java.util.* (but we should not remove it from build files, so we can use MR-JARS in the same way in future). Just open an issue once the vote has passed, I'l take care of removing the Future* classes. Uwe - Uwe Schindler Achterdiek 19, D-28357 Bremen http://www.thetaphi.de eMail: u...@thetaphi.de > -Original Message- > From: Adrien Grand > Sent: Tuesday, March 19, 2019 7:23 PM > To: Lucene Dev > Subject: [VOTE] Master/9.0 to require Java 11 > > Hello, > > Now that Lucene/Solr 8.0 has shipped I'd like us to consider requiring > Java 11 for 9.0, currently the master branch. We had 18 months between > 7.0 and 8.0, so if we assume a similar interval between 8.0 and 9.0 > that would mean releasing 9.0 about 2 years after Java 11, which > sounds like a conservative requirement to me. > > What do you think? > > Here is my +1. > > -- > Adrien > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Master/9.0 to require Java 11
+1 > On 19 Mar 2019, at 18:22, Adrien Grand wrote: > > Hello, > > Now that Lucene/Solr 8.0 has shipped I'd like us to consider requiring > Java 11 for 9.0, currently the master branch. We had 18 months between > 7.0 and 8.0, so if we assume a similar interval between 8.0 and 9.0 > that would mean releasing 9.0 about 2 years after Java 11, which > sounds like a conservative requirement to me. > > What do you think? > > Here is my +1. > > -- > Adrien > > - > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org > - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
[VOTE] Master/9.0 to require Java 11
Hello, Now that Lucene/Solr 8.0 has shipped I'd like us to consider requiring Java 11 for 9.0, currently the master branch. We had 18 months between 7.0 and 8.0, so if we assume a similar interval between 8.0 and 9.0 that would mean releasing 9.0 about 2 years after Java 11, which sounds like a conservative requirement to me. What do you think? Here is my +1. -- Adrien - To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
