Hi Harsha, Comments below.
On Fri, Jun 17, 2016 at 7:48 PM, Harsha <ka...@harsha.io> wrote: > Hi Ismael, > "Are you saying that you are aware of many Kafka users still > using Java 7 > > who would be ready to upgrade to the next Kafka feature release (whatever > > that version number is) before they can upgrade to Java 8?" > I know there quite few users who are still on java 7 This is good to know. > and regarding the > upgrade we can't say Yes or no. Its upto the user discretion when they > choose to upgrade and ofcourse if there are any critical fixes that > might go into the release. We shouldn't be restricting their upgrade > path just because we removed Java 7 support. > My point is that both paths have their pros and cons and we need to weigh them up. If some users are slow to upgrade the Java version (Java 7 has been EOL'd for over a year), there's a good chance that they are slow to upgrade Kafka too. And if that is the case (and it may not be), then holding up improvements for the ones who actually do upgrade may be the wrong call. To be clear, I am still in listening mode and I haven't made up my mind on the subject. Once we released 0.9.0 there aren't any 0.8.x releases. i.e we don't > have LTS type release where we continually ship critical fixes over > 0.8.x minor releases. So if a user notices a critical fix the only > option today is to upgrade to next version where that fix is shipped. > We haven't done a great job at this in the past, but there is no decision that once a new major release is out, we don't do patch releases for the previous major release. In fact, we have been collecting critical fixes in the 0.9.0 branch for a potential 0.9.0.2. I understand there is no decision made yet but given the premise was to > ship this in 0.10.x , possibly 0.10.1 which I don't agree with. In > general against shipping this in 0.10.x version. Removing Java 7 support > when the release is minor in general not a good idea to users. > Sorry if I didn't communicate this properly. I simply meant the next feature release. I used 0.10.1.0 as an example, but it could also be 0.11.0.0 if that turns out to be the next release. A discussion on that will probably take place once the scope is clear. Personally, I think the timing is more important the the version number, but it seems like some people disagree. Ismael
