+1 to switch to JDK 8 + Datanucleus 4. Alex, I'm just wondering how likely it is that we will run into these backporting scenarios? If I look at the past releases I don't see too many minor releases:
[DIR] 1.2.0-incubating/ 2016-04-06 17:49 - [DIR] 1.3.0-incubating/ 2016-04-06 17:49 - [DIR] 1.4.0-incubating/ 2016-04-06 17:49 - [DIR] 1.5.1-incubating/ 2016-04-06 17:49 - [DIR] 1.6.0-incubating/ 2016-04-06 17:49 - [DIR] 1.7.0/ 2017-06-26 18:46 - [DIR] 1.8.0/ It seems a bit limiting not to allow lambdas to me given that we don't maintain active older release branches. Colm. On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 12:34 AM, Alexander Kolbasov <ak...@cloudera.com> wrote: > +1 for both. > > I would be still against actually allowing Java 8 specific code since > people may want to backport fixes to old releases which might still use > Java 7. Allowing Java-8 exclusive features may make this process > complicated. Lambdas are cute, but we can do without them for a while. It > would be good to have some automatic enforcement so that Java8 features do > not leak in accidentally. > > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 3:56 PM, Na Li <lina...@cloudera.com> wrote: > > > +1 for moving to datanucleus 4 and Java 8 > > > > On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Sergio Pena <sergio.p...@cloudera.com> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > There is a JIRA request (SENTRY-1893 > > > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SENTRY-1893>) looking to add > > > support > > > for JDK8 and make it as the default and minimum JDK version to use. > JDK7 > > > has reached the end of life, and many other Apache components > (including > > > Hive 2.1) have already switched to JDK8 as the minimum version. > > > > > > I would like to use this email thread to discuss if we should follow > this > > > trend and switch to JDK8 on our current Sentry 2.0 development. Moving > to > > > JDK8 will also allow us to use the new API that brings, such as lambda > > > functions. > > > > > > Also, in order to support JDK8, we should switch to Datanucleus 4 > because > > > Datanucleus 3 have some problems with it. Datanucleus 3 is also old, > and > > > other components already switched to version 4 as well. We already have > > > support for version 4, so the question here is if we should drop > > > Datanucleus 3 support and just use version 4 as the default. > > > > > > Sentry 2.0 is our current major version development, so it makes sense > to > > > do this move in this version. > > > > > > What do you all think? > > > > > > - Sergio > > > > > > -- Colm O hEigeartaigh Talend Community Coder http://coders.talend.com
