Re: Supporting Java9++

2019-06-20 Thread Stefan Seelmann
For API/server/studio and their Jenkins pieplines I now use Docker containers [1] with preinstalled Java (8/11/12/...) and Maven and other required tools. This makes the build independent of the machine it runs, only Docker is required, but avoids to relay that all tools are installed. [1] https:/

Re: Supporting Java9++

2019-06-18 Thread Shawn McKinney
Thanks Brian and Stefan for the advice. I’ll try it out in a sandbox and report back here how it goes. —Shawn > On Jun 17, 2019, at 12:09 PM, Stefan Seelmann wrote: > > Yes, with other Directory projects (LDAP API, server, studio still WIP) > we do it exactly like that. Additionally in CI we

Re: Supporting Java9++

2019-06-17 Thread Stefan Seelmann
Yes, with other Directory projects (LDAP API, server, studio still WIP) we do it exactly like that. Additionally in CI we use the lowest (Java 8) to build artifacts (installers and JARs uploaded to snapshot repo) just to be on the safe side. Reading JAXB made me shrug, I didn't manage to get it wo

Re: Supporting Java9++

2019-06-17 Thread Brian Demers
IMHO, setting the source & target to 1.8 (or whatever the lower end of your support range is) and running a CI job with a range of versions is the way to go (1.8, 11, etc) That way this uncovers the issues similar to you have mentioned and retains backward compatibility with any of the dependencies