28 Jun
2019
28 Jun
'19
2:30 p.m.
+1 for the docker package to be on Java 11. It's kind of a no-brainer at
this point, as Vincent also mentioned, and I'm not sure which would be the
disadvantages of doing so.
Re backwards compatibility, I'm not sure that's an issue here, since we're
talking about docker containers that you switch entirely (i.e. JVM + server
container + etc.). The backwards compatibility discussion is probably more
appropriate for the debian/OS-specific packages that need to be upgraded
inside the same machine.
Thanks,
Eduard
On Thu, Jun 27, 2019 at 10:50 AM Vincent Massol <vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
Hi,
On 27 Jun 2019, at 09:32, Vincent Massol
<vincent(a)massol.net> wrote:
Hi guys,
We have a decision to take re the docker image.
Until now we were supporting the arm64v8 architecture. However due to
some
changes, it's now ony supported with java11. So we have 2 solutions
for the tomcat base image to use:
1) stay on java8 and move to the adoptopenjdk base image (so that we get
java
patches) BUT drop support for arm64v8 architectures
2) move to java11 and move to the adoptopenjdk
base image (so that we
get java patches) and keep support for arm64v8
archietectures
My POV is that we should do 1) since XWiki is supposed to run well on
Java11 (it
may even be faster on it?) and we want it to work on it anyway.
We also test it with our docker tests every week
I meant 2) :)
Thanks
-Vincent
Side note: we could also decide to move to java11 everywhere on our CI
agents and
keep some tests weekly on java8 (ie invert the current situation)
WDYT?
Thanks
-Vincent