Exactly! When it all started, the "hurdle" to jump 8 > 11 was smaller, but whoever jumped, was literally free after. Today, as 11 is dead, the "hurdle" has been raised to 8 > 17, so whoever is still waiting, is just piling up problems and more work for themselves.
T On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 12:49 PM Mateusz Gajewski < mateusz.gajew...@starburstdata.com> wrote: > Actually as Trino solves a federation problem, we pull in a lot of > dependencies (over 800) and we spent a significant amount of time patching > and fixing upstream dependencies like Hadoop, Hive, Parquet etc to migrate > to JDK 17 when it was released, and lately to 21. Migration from 11 to 17 > was painful due to "strong encapsulation by default". From 17 to 21 was > pretty painless - just a bunch of libraries that needed ASM upgrade and > some deprecated encryption schemes. To my surprise, different OSS > communities are now much more aware of the new JDK versions so testing and > fixing happens in advance. > > On the "big companies stays legacy" topic, we sell the enterprise edition > of Trino (called Starburst Enterprise) which is on-premise, COTS software > to the largest (and probably oldest) companies in the world (from a > variety of sectors). When we plan to transition to a new JDK we inform our > customers several months in advance that this will happen. With JDK 17 we > saw some pushback and we delayed the transition for a couple of months, but > with JDK 21 the situation was totally different - we announced that this > would happen in advance too but this time the feedback was "oh, we've > already allowed JDK 21 usage in our infrastructure, go ahead". Which was > both surprising and encouraging. > > Times are changing. > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 11:22 AM Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> @Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> if you read carefully I never >> wrote >> "all Java 21 projects are toy projects" ;). Eclipse is also not a topic, >> it >> comes as a distro. Quarkus is still 17+21, trinodb is not something >> primarly embedding code, it is more a standalone so more counter examples >> from my understanding of what Maven stands for. >> And yes, a lot of java 21 code will be thrown away today, I never said 50% >> (even less 100% as you meant) but likely > 25%, sure. Same happent for >> java >> 8, 11, 17 so not sure why 21 would be different. >> Does not say 21 is not adopted - I literally wrote the opposite, just >> meant >> we should always interpret figures for what they are and identify their >> bias instead of biasing them more. >> >> Please note that --release does NOT solve anything, think to maven as an >> ecosystem - plugins - and we still want to run with the contextual java >> version I guess - if this hypothesis is wrong please close this thread and >> start a new about this minimalistic feature, if we want to drop that we go >> in the distro erea, drop plugins support but decision is not taken on the >> same points at all - we woud likely dont care of the java version we would >> go that path. >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog >> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github < >> https://github.com/rmannibucau> | >> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book >> < >> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance >> > >> >> >> Le jeu. 22 févr. 2024 à 11:06, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> a >> écrit : >> >> > And one more remark regarding "toy projects": >> > You seriously mean that these numbers could be skewed by "toy projects"? >> > IMHO toy projects, while most probably represented here, are "lost, like >> > tears in the rain". >> > >> > T >> > >> > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 10:39 AM Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > >> lot of java 21 tody is still PoC or toy projects >> > > >> > > Quarkus, TrinoDB or Eclipse are not toy projects. So they fact there >> ARE >> > > "toy projects", you should not derive that "all Java 21 projects are >> toy >> > > projects". >> > > >> > > T >> > > >> > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 10:32 AM Romain Manni-Bucau < >> > rmannibu...@gmail.com> >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > >> [joke]this last diagram looks like you are looking for piece[/] >> > >> >> > >> I'm not sure the weight can be linear like that, it is not because >> you >> > are >> > >> old that you will die - lot of java 21 tody is still PoC or toy >> projects >> > >> so >> > >> should be in the weight somehow if we go this way. >> > >> >> > >> Ultimately your user agent idea was really better than java stat >> alone >> > >> since it is really a cross matrix/time unit we should check. >> > >> >> > >> Sadly all these stats miss, for my understanding, the dynamic behind >> > (like >> > >> seeing a random point in a exponential vs linear graph, alone you >> don't >> > >> know where you are going to). >> > >> >> > >> From memory, trying to use the last years figures it seems the >> dynamic >> > is >> > >> to follow the LTS with some lateness, ie current is 21 but people are >> > >> around 11-17. Like a sliding window. >> > >> Indeed the public polls I use - the ones you get on twitter from >> > intellij >> > >> or friends - for that conclusion are biased cause they hit more >> "geeks" >> > >> than standard work people but I don't have anything better right now >> in >> > >> terms of time serie. >> > >> Anyone has more comparative data about that? >> > >> >> > >> My proposal/thought was really to align on that dynamic - from the >> > latest >> > >> to a limit to cover ~>=65% of people - more than fixing some version >> in >> > >> stone. >> > >> >> > >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> > >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog >> > >> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog >> > >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github < >> > >> https://github.com/rmannibucau> | >> > >> LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book >> > >> < >> > >> >> > >> https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> Le jeu. 22 févr. 2024 à 10:17, Tamás Cservenák <ta...@cservenak.net> >> a >> > >> écrit : >> > >> >> > >> > For start I "normalized" the Java strings to a form like "Java 8" >> or >> > >> "Java >> > >> > 17". This resulted in pretty much similar results as Romain PDF >> (Azul >> > >> > report). >> > >> > >> > >> > But then realized, we should consider this: Not every LTS existed >> at >> > the >> > >> > same time span (and we discuss the future here, not the past). >> Here is >> > >> some >> > >> > history I collected: >> > >> > >> > >> > - Java 8: Covers strings like "Java 1.8.0-25" (2014) to "Java >> > 1.8.0-401" >> > >> > (2024), that is 10 year span. >> > >> > - Java 11: Covers strings like "Java 11-ea" (2018) to "Java >> 11.0.22" >> > >> > (2024), that is a 6 year span. >> > >> > - Java 17: Covers strings like "Java 17-ea" (2021) to "Java >> 17.0.10" >> > >> > (2024), that is a 3 year span. >> > >> > - Java 21: Covers strings like "Java 21-ea" (2023) to "Java 21.0.2" >> > >> (2024), >> > >> > that is 1 year span. >> > >> > >> > >> > So, "normalized" and "weighted" (by lifespan) results are these: >> > >> > https://gist.github.com/cstamas/d2e5560f24ebe6a667834aa1f44d6fc1 >> > >> > >> > >> > Weighted pie immediately shows which Java versions are "dead" (are >> > >> present, >> > >> > but are "sliding out") and which ones are "alive and kicking" (and >> > >> adoption >> > >> > is quite high). >> > >> > >> > >> > --- >> > >> > >> > >> > Refs: >> > >> > - https://www.java.com/releases/ >> > >> > - https://openjdk.org/projects/jdk/11/ >> > >> > - https://openjdk.org/projects/jdk/17/ >> > >> > - https://openjdk.org/projects/jdk/21/ >> > >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024 at 8:50 AM Tamás Cservenák < >> ta...@cservenak.net> >> > >> > wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > > Howdy, >> > >> > > >> > >> > > Maven UA is created like this: >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> https://github.com/apache/maven/blob/master/maven-core/src/main/java/org/apache/maven/internal/aether/DefaultRepositorySystemSessionFactory.java#L555 >> > >> > > >> > >> > > I was hoping also for a list of "Apache Maven ..." lines with >> > >> occurrence >> > >> > > count. >> > >> > > >> > >> > > Now am unsure, for example if any other tool would use "Java X" >> > >> string in >> > >> > > its own UA, is that collected here? >> > >> > > >> > >> > > But let's cook with what we have :) >> > >> > > >> > >> > > T >> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > On Thu, Feb 22, 2024, 08:03 Mateusz Gajewski < >> > >> > > mateusz.gajew...@starburstdata.com> wrote: >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> Do you have maven version and java version at the same time >> > report? I >> > >> > >> wonder if old maven is used with old JDK :) >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 23:23 Brian Fox <bri...@infinity.nu> >> > wrote: >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > Hi everyone. I haven't caught up on this thread but Tamas >> pinged >> > >> me to >> > >> > >> get >> > >> > >> > some usage data from Central. Attached are the Maven versions >> and >> > >> JDK >> > >> > >> > Version counts as reported by User Agent by distinct IP for >> the >> > >> last >> > >> > 30 >> > >> > >> > days: >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Feb 21, 2024 at 4:15 PM Hunter C Payne >> > >> > >> > <hunterpayne2...@yahoo.com.invalid> wrote: >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> I also want to stress that we care about what maven supports >> > far >> > >> > more >> > >> > >> >> than what it requires to build. If it needs JDK 17 to build >> but >> > >> the >> > >> > >> jars >> > >> > >> >> are compliant with Java 8, that's fine with me. >> > >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> Hunter >> > >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> On Wednesday, February 21, 2024 at 12:47:33 PM PST, >> Romain >> > >> > >> >> Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> Hmm, not sure im ready for a 200M vanilla build tool even >> if it >> > >> > would >> > >> > >> >> have >> > >> > >> >> been ok legally... >> > >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> Le mer. 21 févr. 2024 à 21:41, Hunter C Payne >> > >> > >> >> <hunterpayne2...@yahoo.com.invalid> a écrit : >> > >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> >> > I might be wrong but I understood that shipping the >> JRE/JVM >> > >> > >> required a >> > >> > >> >> > license and this is why most people don't ship with a JVM >> > >> bundled. >> > >> > >> But >> > >> > >> >> > perhaps that has changed since the Oracle v Google/Alphabet >> > >> trial. >> > >> > >> >> > Hunter >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> > On Wednesday, February 21, 2024 at 12:00:54 PM PST, >> > Benjamin >> > >> > >> Marwell >> > >> > >> >> < >> > >> > >> >> > bmarw...@apache.org> wrote: >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> > FWIW, bazel changed its runtime requirement to Java 21. >> > >> > >> >> > But they are shipping their own Java Runtime, so their >> users >> > >> won't >> > >> > >> >> notice. >> > >> > >> >> > [1] >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> > I think they are the first build tool to do that. >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> > I say this as a FYI fact only, not implying anything. >> > >> > >> >> > Make of it what you want. >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> > - Ben >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> > Am Di., 20. Feb. 2024 um 21:50 Uhr schrieb Tamás Cservenák >> > >> > >> >> > <ta...@cservenak.net>: >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > > Howdy, >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > > I intentionally used "Maven" here, and not "Maven 4" as >> I am >> > >> sure >> > >> > >> the >> > >> > >> >> > > majority of Maven users do not run Maven on the same Java >> > >> version >> > >> > >> they >> > >> > >> >> > > target with their build. We do not do that either. >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > > Some snippets from Herve (who is the ONLY one doing >> > >> reproducible >> > >> > >> >> checks, >> > >> > >> >> > > kudos for that) votes: >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > > Sun, Feb 18, 2024, 9:38 AM >> > >> > >> >> > > [VOTE] Release Apache Maven Shade Plugin version 3.5.2 >> > >> > >> >> > > Reproducible Build ok: reference build done with JDK 11 >> on >> > >> *nix >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > > Wed, Jan 31, 2024, 5:06 AM >> > >> > >> >> > > [VOTE] Release Apache Maven JLink Plugin version 3.2.0 >> > >> > >> >> > > Reproducible Builds ok: reference build done on *nix with >> > JDK >> > >> 21 >> > >> > >> and >> > >> > >> >> > umask >> > >> > >> >> > > 022 >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > > Mon, Jan 8, 2024, 8:29 AM >> > >> > >> >> > > [VOTE] Release Maven Plugin Tools version 3.11.0 >> > >> > >> >> > > Reproducible Builds ok: reference build done with JDK 8 >> on >> > >> > Windows >> > >> > >> >> with >> > >> > >> >> > > umask >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > > Mon, Dec 18, 2023, 8:59 AM >> > >> > >> >> > > [VOTE] Release Apache Maven Compiler Plugin version >> 3.12.0 >> > >> > >> >> > > Reproducible Builds ok: reference build done on *nix with >> > JDK >> > >> 21 >> > >> > >> and >> > >> > >> >> > umask >> > >> > >> >> > > 022 >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > > Mon, Dec 18, 2023, 8:59 AM >> > >> > >> >> > > [VOTE] Release Apache Maven Compiler Plugin version >> 3.12.0 >> > >> > >> >> > > Reproducible Builds ok: reference build done on *nix with >> > JDK >> > >> 21 >> > >> > >> and >> > >> > >> >> > umask >> > >> > >> >> > > 022 >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > > Wed, Nov 29, 2023, 8:16 AM >> > >> > >> >> > > [VOTE] Apache Maven Build Cache Extension 1.1.0 >> > >> > >> >> > > Reproducible Build ok: reference build done on *nix with >> JDK >> > >> 11 >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > > Sun, Nov 19, 2023, 5:17 PM >> > >> > >> >> > > [VOTE] Release Maven Resolver 1.9.17 >> > >> > >> >> > > Reproducible Build ok: reference build done with JDK 21 >> on >> > >> *nix >> > >> > >> with >> > >> > >> >> > umask >> > >> > >> >> > > 022 >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > > Sat, Oct 21, 2023, 4:34 PM >> > >> > >> >> > > VOTE] Apache Maven 4.0.0-alpha-8 release >> > >> > >> >> > > Reproducible Build ok: reference build done with JDK 21 >> on >> > >> *nix >> > >> > >> with >> > >> > >> >> > umask >> > >> > >> >> > > 022 >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > > Mon, Oct 2, 2023, 9:11 AM >> > >> > >> >> > > [VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.9.5 >> > >> > >> >> > > Reproducible not fully ok: reference build done with JDK >> 17 >> > on >> > >> > *nix >> > >> > >> >> and >> > >> > >> >> > > umask 022 >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > > ==== >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > > This CLEARLY shows the tendency: >> > >> > >> >> > > - Michael does releases on Java 8 (on windows!), he is a >> > known >> > >> > >> >> "aligner" >> > >> > >> >> > > and windows person :) >> > >> > >> >> > > - Olivier used the "minimum" required Java version (for >> > build >> > >> > >> cache). >> > >> > >> >> > > - Unsure why Herve used Java 11 for the Shade plugin... I >> > >> mean, >> > >> > he >> > >> > >> >> could >> > >> > >> >> > > use 21 but also 8, but he shot for 11 that was EOL at the >> > >> moment >> > >> > of >> > >> > >> >> > release. >> > >> > >> >> > > - The rest is 21. >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > > ==== >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > > So, the question for those refusing anything other than >> Java >> > >> 8 to >> > >> > >> >> _run_ >> > >> > >> >> > > Maven (or to revert: for those refusing to run Maven on >> > >> "latest >> > >> > >> LTS", >> > >> > >> >> > that >> > >> > >> >> > > is currently 21): >> > >> > >> >> > > WHY? >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> > >> >> > > Thanks >> > >> > >> >> > > T >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > >> > >> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> > >> > >> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > >> > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> > >> > >> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> > >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> >> > > >> > >> >
