Raghavendra, I don't think there should be any problems running ODE binary under JDK 8.
It's only that you will not be able to compile the source under JDK 7 and above with source and target version set to JDK 7.I have listed in my previous post where we need to move towards JPA 2 to fix that. It would be of great help if you could test on JDK 8 and let us know, so that we can try to fix that in the trunk. regards, sathwik On Sun, Dec 20, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Raghvendra Srivastava < [email protected]> wrote: > Sathwik, > As you know we are using ode in our application and we need to move to > java8 for compliance and security reasons. Many of our customers are asking > us to move our applications to java8. I was wondering what are the plans > for porting ode to Java 8 given that Java 7 has also reached EOL few months > back? > Best regards, > Rag > > On Sunday, December 20, 2015, Pierre Smits <[email protected]> wrote: > > > FYI: Java 7 is EOL since April 2015 > > > > Best regards, > > > > Pierre Smits > > > > ORRTIZ.COM <http://www.orrtiz.com> > > OFBiz based solutions & services > > > > OFBiz Extensions Marketplace > > http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/ > > > > On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Sathwik B P <[email protected] > > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > > > I wish to confirm that the migration has worked. > > > > > > Initial setup: > > > ODE war: ODE 1.3.5 with Hibernate 3.2.5 > > > Tomcat 6.0.44 with Bitronix TM 2.1.4 > > > JDK 1.5.0_22 > > > Mysql: 5.6.27-0ubuntu0.15.04.1 (Ubuntu) > > > > > > > > > Migration setup: > > > ODE war: ODE 1.3.7-SNAPSHOT built with minimum binary compatibility > to > > > JDK 6 with Hibernate 3.3.2 > > > TomEE 1.7.12 > > > JDK 1.7.0_80 > > > Mysql: 5.6.27-0ubuntu0.15.04.1 (Ubuntu) > > > > > > We can now move release ODE 1.3.7 with binary compatibility to JDK 6. > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > sathwik > > > > > > On Sun, Dec 6, 2015 at 7:51 PM, Sathwik B P <[email protected] > > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > As of now I have faced two issues with the compiling of ODE-1.3.x > > source > > > > after changing the binary compatibility to 1.6 > > > > > > > > A) With the removal of usage of APT tool in Rakefile. How do we > > generate > > > > the Channel and ChannelListener sources. There were 2 options > > > > 1) Rewrite the annotation processor using new API > > > > 2) Manually add the generated sources to the repo which was > > generated > > > > with JDK 1.5 > > > > > > > > Since we don't use the annotations API in the trunk anymore, I choose > > to > > > > manually add the generated source to the repo. > > > > > > > > > > > > B) XMLBeans, for multiple occurrence element defined in XSD schema > > > > generates different methods under JDK 1.5 and JDK 1.6 > > > > > > > > Collection<Something> getSomethingList() -----JDK 1.5 > > > > Something[] getSomethingArray() ----- JDK 1.6 > > > > > > > > The generated sources from XMLBeans is predominantly used in the > > > > Management API within ODE. So, I assume the dependency on this API by > > > > external customers would be rare as they would be entitled to use the > > > WSDL > > > > and XSD. > > > > > > > > These are the following changes that have resulted due to the changes > > in > > > > the XMLBeans generated sources that has gone into trunk and the same > > > needs > > > > to be backported to ode 1.3.7 to make it work on JDK 1.6 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/ode/commit/ad45177f76a4a7518cb3f79d76e52f55cb86a9c6 > > > > > > > > > > > > regards, > > > > sathwik > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Dec 2, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Sathwik B P <[email protected] > > <javascript:;>> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> I will plan some migration tests since ODE does object > serialization. > > > >> > > > >> Our last release was ODE 1.3.6, but will use a version older to that > > > >> which is ODE 1.3.5 > > > >> > > > >> Initial setup: > > > >> ODE war: ODE 1.3.5 > > > >> Tomcat 6.0.44 > > > >> JDK 1.5.0_22 > > > >> > > > >> Deploy some processes (sample processes that come packaged with ODE > > > >> distribution and a custom process that uses explicit correlation) > and > > > >> initiate instances. > > > >> > > > >> Migration setup: > > > >> ODE war: Replace ODE 1.3.5 deployed previously with ODE > > 1.3.7-SNAPSHOT > > > >> built with minimum binary compatibility to JDK 6 > > > >> Tomcat 6.0.44 > > > >> JDK 1.6.0_45 > > > >> > > > >> Now complete pending process instances and create new instances. > > > >> > > > >> Will come back with the migration test results. > > > >> > > > >> regards, > > > >> sathwik > > > >> > > > >> On Mon, Nov 30, 2015 at 1:35 AM, Kevin SEJOURNE < > > > >> [email protected] <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > >> > > > >>> Hello, > > > >>> > > > >>> Why wait for jdk8 ? > > > >>> +1 for moving for a newer version. > > > >>> > > > >>> Regards, > > > >>> Kevin > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> Kevin SEJOURNE > > > >>> Ingénieur Recherche et Développement > > > >>> Standard : +33141917777 | Fax : +33141917778 > > > >>> 215, avenue Georges Clemenceau - 92024 - Nanterre > > > >>> www.intrinsec.com > > > >>> > > > >>> ________________________________________ > > > >>> De : Hadrian Zbarcea <[email protected] <javascript:;>> > > > >>> Envoyé : samedi 28 novembre 2015 13:55 > > > >>> À : [email protected] <javascript:;> > > > >>> Objet : [!!Mass Mail]Re: Move towards binary compatibility to JDK > 1.6 > > > or > > > >>> JDK 1.7 for 1.3.7 RELEASE > > > >>> > > > >>> +1 for moving to either jdk7 (safer bet) or even jdk8. > > > >>> > > > >>> Hadrian > > > >>> > > > >>> On 11/27/2015 06:19 PM, Tammo van Lessen wrote: > > > >>> > +1 for moving to JDK 7 (although its also already EOL), so JDK 8 > > > would > > > >>> also > > > >>> > be an option if nobody objects. > > > >>> > > > > >>> > On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 7:57 AM, Sathwik B P < > [email protected] > > <javascript:;>> > > > >>> wrote: > > > >>> > > > > >>> >> Hi All, > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> This is a proposal to move towards minimum compliance to JDK 1.6 > > or > > > >>> 1.7 > > > >>> >> from existing JDK 1.5 for ODE 1.3.7 RELEASE. > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> Is there anyone still on JDK 5 or 6? Let us know if there are > any > > > >>> concerns. > > > >>> >> > > > >>> >> regards, > > > >>> >> sathwik > > > >>> >> > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >
