> I don't personally believe that we need to port everything from Akka releases as they become available under the Apache license. I would prefer to concentrate on bug fixes and test coverage. Enhancements if people want them but I don't think we should grab them without evidence they are wanted by Pekko users.
I actually disagree here, although within reason. For me, if there are changes that are isolated and easy to port then we should do that (if someone is willing to do it), it's better for end users and there is no argument against it aside from rushing a 1.3.x release. I understand that we need more tests and bug fixes but it's not a zero sum game, and in any case the Akka devs are very diligent in adding tests to any features that they implement so porting back changes is not going to change our status quo very much. And to close off, I wouldn't rely that much on user feedback when it comes to Pekko because it's historically not a very good way to gauge what features users want. Generally speaking people complain when there is a bug/something is not working (my personal theory for behind this is that its a holdover from how Akka was managed, i.e. Akka being BDFL and driving the project and our users haven't transitioned to a community mindset fully). Kind regards, Matthew On Sat, Nov 8, 2025 at 8:24 PM PJ Fanning <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't personally believe that we need to port everything from Akka > releases as they become available under the Apache license. I would > prefer to concentrate on bug fixes and test coverage. Enhancements if > people want them but I don't think we should grab them without > evidence they are wanted by Pekko users. > > Once Pekko 2.0.0 is out, I don't think we should continue to take Akka > changes over to 1.x unless they fix critical bugs - that they should > only go into 2.x in normal circumstances. > > There is a reasonable chance that Akka 2.8.0 changes will become > Apache licensed before we get to release Pekko 2.0.0. But maybe, it > might focus our minds to get 2.0.0 complete before then. We could then > just add Akka 2.8.0 stuff in a Pekko 2.x release. > > On Sat, 8 Nov 2025 at 20:08, kerr <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I see, but if we want to support 1.4.0, then we will have much to port, > eg, > > Akka 2.8.0 needs to be ported to Pekko 1.4.x too . > > And we don't have the same setup, eg, sortImports, Scala versions, Java > > formatter, and Scala formatter, etc., which causes cherry picking a huge > > burden. > > While porting recently, I had to do many manual sortings to make the code > > work with 1.3.x > > > > 何品 > > > > > > PJ Fanning <[email protected]> 于2025年11月9日周日 01:43写道： > > > > > 1.x releases will support Java 8. > > > I'm not going to guess what sort of 1.x releases we will need but we > > > will continue to do 1.x releases including some small enhancements > > > until 2.0.0 full release happens. After 2.0.0 is out, I think it is > > > fairly likely that we will only fix bugs in 1.x and this will likely > > > mean only occasional patch releases. > > > We could easily end up with 1.3.1 or 1.4.0 releases and possibly > beyond. > > > > > > On Sat, 8 Nov 2025 at 14:37, kerr <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Is Pekko 1.3.0 the last release that we plan to support Java 8? > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > 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] > >
