Definitely good idea.
For what it's worth, we already run James on JDK17 (it was finally possible after getting rid of
serialization library a while back; probably jump to JDK21 would be fine as well right now).
From building point of view (thus enforcing minimal JDK to be run on) - I don't see why anyone
would still would want to stick with version 11. Java picked up speed and it's a good thing.
Wojtek
On 06/11/2023 04:46, Rene Cordier wrote:
Hello guys,
Well currently James is based on JDK 11. Should we think about upgrading to at least the next LTS,
JDK 17? (or why even not the current LTS, which is the JDK 21?) I saw it being asked by a community
member on a PR a while ago (Antoine Duprat) and in our company, we would be glad for such an upgrade
as well.
Might need a bit of work but the project could definitely benefit from it: records (finish the long
verbose POJOs), pattern matching, better GC handling, etc.
Would other people be interested about it too? Is it a problem for some others
in the community?
Rene.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscr...@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-h...@james.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-user-unsubscr...@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-user-h...@james.apache.org
