Re: Re : Upgrade James to JDK17?

Hi,

It seems the community in general is in favor of migrating to JDK 21! 
For this I created an issue on the JIRA board: 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JAMES-3961

To answer some people with concerns or sharings in the thread:

- Wojtek: we also run our version of James on JDK17 now. But having the 
code base following up would be clearly better :)

- Jean: I believe we just ended up using allopens as well on our side 
too. Dunno much about those jigsaw modules and how complex it could be 
to switch to this but it could be worth trying

- Karsten: to the question should we maintain at least for the next 
version of James a JDK 11 version in parallel, I'm less sure. I feel 
it's probably the better way, but the resources on development aren't 
that big, it would put more pressure on the devs to maintain 2 code 
bases simultaneously. I'm not personally in favor TBH (but maybe the 
community is willing to make this effort).

Thanks and best regards,

Rene.

On 11/6/23 20:37, Karsten Otto wrote:
> +1 for JDK 21.
>
> I think the module enforcement may have quite an architectural impact 
> though. Maybe we should have a separate James version 3.9 or even 4.0 
> for a clean cut?
>
> Cheers, Karsten
>
> On 06.11.23 6:42 AM, Benoit TELLIER wrote:
>>
>> +1 for JDK 21.
>>
>> Thanks for the proposal.
>>
>> -- 
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Benoit TELLIER
>>
>> General manager of Linagora VIETNAM.
>> Product owner for Team-Mail product.
>> Chairman of the Apache James project.
>>
>> Mail: [email protected]
>> Tel: (0033) 6 77 26 04 58 (WhatsApp, Signal)
>>
>>
>> Le nov. 6, 2023 4:47 AM, de Rene Cordier 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]
>>
>>
>>
>>