Hi everyone, I checked the repositories and Phase 1 looks done. Thanks for everyone involved. Now we can go ahead for the Phase 2. Here is my proposal for it: - All PR checks are moved to Java 21. - New PR check is introduced for each repository, that will build and test the changes with Java 17. - Release pipelines are updated to use Java 21.
What do you think, please? This may be influenced by another thread on the mailing list - about 10.2.0 release. To not have impact on the release, I propose these changes to be done after 10.2.0 is released. Best regards, Tibor On Thu, Sep 18, 2025 at 9:31 AM Tibor Zimányi <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Paolo, > > the first phase should be done, I just didn't have time to double check > everything, yet, due to my job related workload. I plan to do that till the > end of the month. Then there will be a proposal about the phase 2. > > Thank you very much for reminding me. > > Best regards, > Tibor > > Dňa št 18. 9. 2025, 8:51 Paolo Bizzarri <[email protected]> napísal(a): > >> Hi Tibor, >> >> I am not sure which is the status for this much appreciated proposal. >> >> I can see that we had commits in drools and kogito runtimes about >> supporting java 21, so maybe this has been already completed? >> >> Thanks again for all the effort. >> >> Regards >> >> Paolo >> >> >> < >> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail >> > >> Privo >> di virus.www.avast.com >> < >> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail >> > >> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2> >> >> On Mon, Aug 4, 2025 at 3:03 PM Tibor Zimányi <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > Hi everyone, >> > >> > thanks everyone for feedback! I see there are no objections to this and >> > someone mentioned to me (I think Jason and Tiago) that if there are no >> > objections, we don't need a vote. So if there will be no objections to >> > continue with this without a vote until the end of today, I will let >> people >> > that are already involved in this task to start contributing by opening >> PRs >> > in the relevant repositories. >> > >> > For the PR checks, I will send a more detailed proposal for the Phase >> 2. I >> > think Phase 1 can happen without the need to change CI anyhow, as we >> want >> > to target also Java 17 compatibility. I agree, it would be good to have >> PR >> > checks for both Java 17 and 21 in the future. It will be part of the >> Phase >> > 2 proposal. >> > >> > Best regards, >> > Tibor >> > >> > On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 10:07 PM Jason Porter <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > I agree to this as well. I know it isn't ideal, but as Tiago stated >> > > running PRs on both versions of Java is the only way to be sure we >> don't >> > > break one of the versions. >> > > >> > > On 2025/07/31 19:59:12 Tiago Bento wrote: >> > > > I definitely agree that we need to move the code base to Java 21. >> > > > Thanks Tibor for the proposal. Because we want to keep Java 17 being >> > > > supported, I think our only guarantee would be to have builds >> running >> > > > in both versions for PR checks. Otherwise we risk breaking one of >> the >> > > > versions and only finding out when it's already too late. >> > > > >> > > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 7:39 AM Deepak Joseph < >> > [email protected]> >> > > wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > +1 I agree with this proposal to make code buildable and runnable >> > with >> > > Java >> > > > > 21 >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Regards, >> > > > > Deepak Joseph >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 1:35 PM Yeser Amer <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > > > Thank you for the clarification, +1 (and I'm available to help >> in >> > > this >> > > > > > effort) >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On 2025/07/31 07:52:36 Tibor Zimányi wrote: >> > > > > > > Hi, >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > thanks for the feedback. It is basically as Francisco wrote. >> We >> > > have >> > > > > > Maven >> > > > > > > properties configured with 17, but there was no coordinated >> > effort >> > > yet to >> > > > > > > find out if everything works also on 21. This proposal is >> about >> > > it. There >> > > > > > > may be multiple things not working with 21, as e.g. mentioned >> in >> > > GWT, or >> > > > > > > there may be some enforcer rules around jdks etc. This effort >> > > should make >> > > > > > > sure everything is buildable and runnable on both Java 21 and >> > Java >> > > 17. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > For the PR checks, I think we can have a broader discussion >> if we >> > > agree >> > > > > > on >> > > > > > > this one and when we get to the point of starting the Phase >> 2. I >> > > am not >> > > > > > > against having a Java 17 PR check, it may be useful. It just >> > needs >> > > to be >> > > > > > > scoped properly (e.g. I expect not all PR checks are needed as >> > > Java 17 >> > > > > > ones >> > > > > > > etc.). >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Hope that clarifies. >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Best regards, >> > > > > > > Tibor >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 31, 2025 at 9:36 AM Yeser Amer <[email protected]> >> > > wrote: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > Dmitrii, >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > At that moment, I experimented with GWT 2.10. Indeed it >> could >> > be >> > > worth >> > > > > > > > trying again with 2.12, thank you for pointing that. >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > On 2025/07/30 17:40:46 Dmitrii Tikhomirov wrote: >> > > > > > > > > This is strange, because at present GWT’s minimum Java >> > version >> > > is 11, >> > > > > > > > and the supported source level is 17. As far as I >> understand, >> > it >> > > should >> > > > > > > > work with version 21 as well >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > https://github.com/gwtproject/gwt/releases/tag/2.12.0 >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > On Jul 30, 2025, at 7:59 AM, Yeser Amer < >> [email protected]> >> > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > Right, it makes sense. >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > A point to share is that we have all GWT modules with >> that >> > > property >> > > > > > > > set to JDK 8, because I failed to compile our GWT sources >> with >> > > any JDK >> > > > > > 8+, >> > > > > > > > when I tried some months ago. >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > On 2025/07/30 14:49:05 Francisco Javier Tirado Sarti >> wrote: >> > > > > > > > > >> I was going to say that, as far as I know, all modules >> > > should be >> > > > > > set >> > > > > > > > to 17 >> > > > > > > > > >> now. Anyway, the task is to verify that assumption is >> > true. >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >> On Wed, Jul 30, 2025 at 4:43 PM Yeser Amer < >> > > [email protected]> >> > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > >>> Tibor, >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> Thank you for your initiative, can you please clarify: >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>>> Phase 1: >> > > > > > > > > >>>> - Setting the release property: >> > > > > > > > > >>>> <maven.compiler.release>17</maven.compiler.release>. >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> That means that we currently have some modules with >> JDK >> > > version >> > > > > > < 17, >> > > > > > > > > >>> right? >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>>> Phase 2: >> > > > > > > > > >>>> - Update the KIE CI to use Java 21 by default. This >> > means: >> > > > > > > > > >>>> - Making sure PR checks run with Java 21. >> > > > > > > > > >>>> - Making sure the release builds run with Java 21. >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> If I understood correctly, we have to support both >> JDK 17 >> > > and >> > > > > > JDK 21 >> > > > > > > > for a >> > > > > > > > > >>> while. Should we expect to have 2 subsets of PR >> Checks, >> > > one that >> > > > > > runs >> > > > > > > > > >>> against JDK 17 and one that compiles against JDK 21 >> > > (optaplanner >> > > > > > is >> > > > > > > > > >>> correctly doing that against JDK 17 and 20)? >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> Thanks >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> Yeser >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> On 2025/07/30 11:54:23 Tibor Zimányi wrote: >> > > > > > > > > >>>> Hi everyone, >> > > > > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > > > > >>>> as Java 21 is the latest Java LTS available, already >> for >> > > some >> > > > > > time, >> > > > > > > > I >> > > > > > > > > >>> would >> > > > > > > > > >>>> like to propose that the code should be buildable and >> > > runnable >> > > > > > with >> > > > > > > > Java >> > > > > > > > > >>>> 21, while still retaining compatibility with Java 17. >> > > > > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > > > > >>>> The work should be split into two phases like this: >> > > > > > > > > >>>> Phase 1: >> > > > > > > > > >>>> - Setting the release property: >> > > > > > > > > >>>> <maven.compiler.release>17</maven.compiler.release>. >> > > > > > > > > >>>> - This should make sure the code works with Java >> 17. >> > > > > > > > > >>>> - This should make sure that the existing CI still >> > > works the >> > > > > > > > same way >> > > > > > > > > >>>> and is able to build releases etc., because even if >> we >> > > have >> > > > > > Java 17 >> > > > > > > > as a >> > > > > > > > > >>>> build environment, with the setting, it should work. >> > > > > > > > > >>>> - Fixing the problems that occur while trying to >> build >> > the >> > > > > > > > repositories >> > > > > > > > > >>>> with Java 21 and are caused by Java 21. >> > > > > > > > > >>>> - Fixing the problems that occur while running tests >> > with >> > > Java >> > > > > > 21 >> > > > > > > > and are >> > > > > > > > > >>>> caused by Java 21. >> > > > > > > > > >>>> - Updating the images we publish and need JDK to >> contain >> > > JDK 21 >> > > > > > > > instead >> > > > > > > > > >>> of >> > > > > > > > > >>>> 17. >> > > > > > > > > >>>> - Target of the work are all Apache KIE repositories, >> > > mainly: >> > > > > > > > > >>>> incubator-kie-drools, incubator-kie-optaplanner, >> > > > > > > > > >>>> incubator-kie-kogito-runtimes, >> > incubator-kie-kogito-apps, >> > > > > > > > > >>>> incubator-kie-kogito-examples, incubator-kie-tools. >> > > > > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > > > > >>>> Phase 2: >> > > > > > > > > >>>> - Update the KIE CI to use Java 21 by default. This >> > means: >> > > > > > > > > >>>> - Making sure PR checks run with Java 21. >> > > > > > > > > >>>> - Making sure the release builds run with Java 21. >> > > > > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > > > > >>>> What do you think, please? I plan to open a vote on >> > Monday >> > > > > > based on >> > > > > > > > the >> > > > > > > > > >>>> feedback of this discussion. Finding people to do >> this >> > > work is >> > > > > > > > already >> > > > > > > > > >>>> done, at least for Phase 1. >> > > > > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > > > > >>>> Best regards, >> > > > > > > > > >>>> Tibor >> > > > > > > > > >>>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > > > > > > >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> [email protected] >> > > > > > > > > >>> For additional commands, e-mail: >> [email protected] >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >>> >> > > > > > > > > >> >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: >> [email protected] >> > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > >> > > >> > >> >
