Re: [SUGGESTION] Target branches 3.5 and master (3.6) to Java 8

I'd recommend starting a separate [VOTE] thread to make it more obvious. Is there a jira? I didn't see it on this thread, would be good to create/document. Regards, Patrick On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 10:43 AM, Andor Molnar wrote: > Silence probably means 'yes', so I start the vote now. > > *Shall

Re: [SUGGESTION] Target branches 3.5 and master (3.6) to Java 8

Silence probably means 'yes', so I start the vote now. *Shall we upgrade the minimum required Java version to compile and run ZooKeeper on 3.5 and master branches to Java 1.8?* *Yes / No* I vote for 'Yes'. Regards, Andor On Mon, Mar 19, 2018 at 1:35 PM, Andor Molnar wrote: > From the respo

Re: [SUGGESTION] Target branches 3.5 and master (3.6) to Java 8

>From the responses on 'user' list, I think we are good to go. What do you think? Andor On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 12:04 PM, Andor Molnar wrote: > Okay, I dropped a mail on the user list to get some feedback. > > > Regards, > Andor > > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 5:59 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote: > >>

Re: [SUGGESTION] Target branches 3.5 and master (3.6) to Java 8

Okay, I dropped a mail on the user list to get some feedback. Regards, Andor On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 5:59 PM, Patrick Hunt wrote: > Perhaps discuss on the user list as Flavio mentioned prior to calling a > vote? Has anyone looked at dependencies, is this consistent with what the > rest of the

Re: [SUGGESTION] Target branches 3.5 and master (3.6) to Java 8

Perhaps discuss on the user list as Flavio mentioned prior to calling a vote? Has anyone looked at dependencies, is this consistent with what the rest of the ecosystem has defined. Hadoop/Hbase/Kafka/... components, Curator, etc... Regards, Patrick On Thu, Feb 22, 2018 at 7:52 AM, Andor Molnar

Re: [SUGGESTION] Target branches 3.5 and master (3.6) to Java 8

Is everybody happy with the plan that Tamaas suggested? Shall we start a vote? Andor On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 11:34 PM, Mark Fenes wrote: > Hi All, > > I totally support the idea of upgrading to Java 8 and I agree with Abe that > we should not require different minimum versions of Java for the

Re: [SUGGESTION] Target branches 3.5 and master (3.6) to Java 8

Hi All, I totally support the idea of upgrading to Java 8 and I agree with Abe that we should not require different minimum versions of Java for the client and the server. Also skipping the non-LTS versions sounds reasonable. Regards, Mark On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 8:49 PM, Tamás Pénzes wrote:

Re: [SUGGESTION] Target branches 3.5 and master (3.6) to Java 8

Hi Tamaas, Thanks for the feedback. I'm fine with the plan. We might want to send a message to the user list once we reach some agreement here to assess whether users have a concern. -Flavio > On 20 Feb 2018, at 20:49, Tamás Pénzes wrote: > > Hi All, > > Just to add my 2 cents. // Might be

Re: [SUGGESTION] Target branches 3.5 and master (3.6) to Java 8

Hi All, Just to add my 2 cents. // Might be five, I write long. :) Hope, you find valuable bits. As many of us I also hope that ZooKeeper 3.5 will be released soon. Until then most of the changes go into master and branch-3.5 too, so I would keep them on the same Java version for code compatibili

Re: [SUGGESTION] Target branches 3.5 and master (3.6) to Java 8

I'm fine with moving to Java 8 or even 9 in 3.6. Does anyone have a different option? Otherwise, should we start a vote? -Flavio > On 16 Feb 2018, at 21:28, Abraham Fine wrote: > > I'm a -1 on requiring different minimum versions of java for the client and > the server. I think this has the

Re: [SUGGESTION] Target branches 3.5 and master (3.6) to Java 8

I'm a -1 on requiring different minimum versions of java for the client and the server. I think this has the potential to create a lot of confusion for users and contributors. I would support moving master (3.6) to java 8, I also think it is worth considering moving to java 9. Given how long

Re: [SUGGESTION] Target branches 3.5 and master (3.6) to Java 8

2018-02-16 14:20 GMT+01:00 Andor Molnar : > +1 for setting the Java8 requirement on server side. > > *Client side.* > I'd like the idea of the setting the requirement on client side too without > introducing anything Java8 specific. I'm not planning to use Java8 features > right on, just thinking

Re: [SUGGESTION] Target branches 3.5 and master (3.6) to Java 8

+1 for setting the Java8 requirement on server side. *Client side.* I'd like the idea of the setting the requirement on client side too without introducing anything Java8 specific. I'm not planning to use Java8 features right on, just thinking of opening the gates would be useful in the long run.

Re: [SUGGESTION] Target branches 3.5 and master (3.6) to Java 8

We have this section in the admin doc that talks about the system requirements: https://zookeeper.apache.org/doc/r3.5.3-beta/zookeeperAdmin.html#sc_requiredSoftware If we change, then we have to update that s