From dev-return-2099-apmail-samza-dev-archive=samza.apache.org@samza.incubator.apache.org Tue Dec 9 16:41:29 2014 Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-samza-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-samza-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5813310846 for ; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 16:41:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 10831 invoked by uid 500); 9 Dec 2014 16:41:29 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-samza-dev-archive@samza.apache.org Received: (qmail 10779 invoked by uid 500); 9 Dec 2014 16:41:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@samza.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@samza.incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@samza.incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 10766 invoked by uid 99); 9 Dec 2014 16:41:28 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 16:41:28 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of prvs=413938d0d=criccomini@linkedin.com designates 69.28.149.80 as permitted sender) Received: from [69.28.149.80] (HELO esv4-mav04.corp.linkedin.com) (69.28.149.80) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 16:41:03 +0000 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.07,546,1413270000"; d="scan'208";a="163261897" Received: from ESV4-MB03.linkedin.biz ([fe80::1caa:1422:7ef8:5ceb]) by ESV4-HT01.linkedin.biz ([::1]) with mapi id 14.03.0195.001; Tue, 9 Dec 2014 08:39:51 -0800 From: Chris Riccomini To: "dev@samza.incubator.apache.org" Subject: Re: Recommended JDK version? Thread-Topic: Recommended JDK version? Thread-Index: AQHP+ETkZtFAqcgbO0GrSsAEhuaOVpyHrPKA Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2014 16:39:51 +0000 Message-ID: References: <5458CF13.6080108@tivo.com> In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: user-agent: Microsoft-MacOutlook/14.4.5.141003 x-originating-ip: [172.18.46.251] Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-ID: Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Hey all, We've reached a bit of an impasse between upgrading to Scala 2.11: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SAMZA-469 And deprecating JDK 6: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SAMZA-455 It looks as though Scalatra 2.3, which is required for Scala 2.11 support, was built using JDK 7. This means that upgrading to Scala 2.11 forces us to deprecate JDK 6. It is possible for us to work around this by eliminating the Scalatra dependency, but this would require some work in samza-yarn. Thoughts? Cheers, Chris On 11/4/14 6:58 AM, "Martin Kleppmann" wrote: >Hi Tommy, > >There was a discussion about minimum JDK requirements a few months ago, >and at the time, nobody was asking for JDK 6 support, so we bumped the >requirement up to JDK 7. However, in the meantime, there have been some >requests for JDK 6. > >I've tried to summarise the state of the discussion on this ticket: >https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SAMZA-455 -- please chime in there. > >Thanks, >Martin > >On 4 Nov 2014, at 13:05, Tommy Becker wrote: > >> Hey folks, >> I've noticed that the Samza jars from Maven are compiled for JDK 7. I >>don't see anything about a minimum JDK version on the site. We are >>currently still on JDK 6 and I'm trying to decide whether we should go >>ahead and upgrade or whether we can recompile Samza for JDK 6. What are >>your thoughts? >>=20 >> -Tommy >>=20 >>=20 >> ________________________________ >>=20 >> This email and any attachments may contain confidential and privileged >>material for the sole use of the intended recipient. Any review, >>copying, or distribution of this email (or any attachments) by others is >>prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the >>sender immediately and permanently delete this email and any >>attachments. No employee or agent of TiVo Inc. is authorized to conclude >>any binding agreement on behalf of TiVo Inc. by email. Binding >>agreements with TiVo Inc. may only be made by a signed written agreement. >