Re: Upgrade James to JDK17?

Definitely good idea.

For what it's worth, we already run James on JDK17 (it was finally possible after getting rid of 
serialization library a while back; probably jump to JDK21 would be fine as well right now).

 From building point of view (thus enforcing minimal JDK to be run on) - I don't see why anyone 
would still would want to stick with version 11. Java picked up speed and it's a good thing.

Wojtek

On 06/11/2023 04:46, Rene Cordier wrote:
> Hello guys,
> 
> Well currently James is based on JDK 11. Should we think about upgrading to at least the next LTS, 
> JDK 17? (or why even not the current LTS, which is the JDK 21?) I saw it being asked by a community 
> member on a PR a while ago (Antoine Duprat) and in our company, we would be glad for such an upgrade 
> as well.
> 
> Might need a bit of work but the project could definitely benefit from it: records (finish the long 
> verbose POJOs), pattern matching, better GC handling, etc.
> 
> Would other people be interested about it too? Is it a problem for some others in the community?
> 
> Rene.
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>