Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

HADOOP-15984. Update LICENSE-binary with jersey 2 details #7315

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: trunk
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

pjfanning
Copy link
Contributor

Description of PR

Update license for Jersey.

How was this patch tested?

For code changes:

  • Does the title or this PR starts with the corresponding JIRA issue id (e.g. 'HADOOP-17799. Your PR title ...')?
  • Object storage: have the integration tests been executed and the endpoint declared according to the connector-specific documentation?
  • If adding new dependencies to the code, are these dependencies licensed in a way that is compatible for inclusion under ASF 2.0?
  • If applicable, have you updated the LICENSE, LICENSE-binary, NOTICE-binary files?

@github-actions github-actions bot added the trunk label Jan 22, 2025
@hadoop-yetus
Copy link

🎊 +1 overall

Vote Subsystem Runtime Logfile Comment
+0 🆗 reexec 0m 50s Docker mode activated.
_ Prechecks _
+1 💚 dupname 0m 0s No case conflicting files found.
+0 🆗 codespell 0m 0s codespell was not available.
+0 🆗 detsecrets 0m 0s detect-secrets was not available.
+0 🆗 shelldocs 0m 0s Shelldocs was not available.
+1 💚 @author 0m 0s The patch does not contain any @author tags.
_ trunk Compile Tests _
+1 💚 shadedclient 41m 18s branch has no errors when building and testing our client artifacts.
_ Patch Compile Tests _
+1 💚 blanks 0m 0s The patch has no blanks issues.
+1 💚 shellcheck 0m 1s No new issues.
+1 💚 shadedclient 37m 29s patch has no errors when building and testing our client artifacts.
_ Other Tests _
+1 💚 asflicense 0m 37s The patch does not generate ASF License warnings.
82m 14s
Subsystem Report/Notes
Docker ClientAPI=1.47 ServerAPI=1.47 base: https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/hadoop-multibranch/job/PR-7315/1/artifact/out/Dockerfile
GITHUB PR #7315
Optional Tests dupname asflicense codespell detsecrets shellcheck shelldocs
uname Linux 8c113a2364ac 5.15.0-125-generic #135-Ubuntu SMP Fri Sep 27 13:53:58 UTC 2024 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux
Build tool maven
Personality dev-support/bin/hadoop.sh
git revision trunk / 9fe9e20
Max. process+thread count 543 (vs. ulimit of 5500)
modules C: . U: .
Console output https://ci-hadoop.apache.org/job/hadoop-multibranch/job/PR-7315/1/console
versions git=2.25.1 maven=3.6.3 shellcheck=0.7.0
Powered by Apache Yetus 0.14.0 https://yetus.apache.org

This message was automatically generated.

org.glassfish.jersey.containers:jersey-container-servlet-core:2.46
org.glassfish.jersey.media:jersey-media-json-jettison:2.46
org.glassfish.jersey.media:jersey-media-jaxb:2.46

Copy link
Contributor

@slfan1989 slfan1989 Jan 22, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@steveloughran @ayushtkn @Hexiaoqiao Using this PR, I would like to ask whether we need to backport this(Hadoop-15984) to branch-3.4, or should we release it in hadoop-3.5.0?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I'm starting to wonder what it'd take to get a 3.5.0 out, with java 17 the minimum version...

how incompatible is this change downstream?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

From my perspective, I haven't noticed any significant compatibility issues so far, as Jersey 2.46 should be able to compile without issues on JDK 8, JDK 11, and JDK 17. I tried compiling the trunk code with JDK 17, and everything worked fine. Of course, if we plan to release the first version officially supporting JDK 17, there is still some additional work to be done. The biggest task right now is upgrading from JUnit 4 to JUnit 5, and my colleague and I are working on this together. He has developed an automated code conversion tool that can greatly improve the efficiency of the upgrade. I'm currently coordinating with him to verify the details, and once everything is confirmed, we can accelerate the migration from JUnit 4 to JUnit 5.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@pjfanning Can you share any compatibility issues you've encountered? I personally haven't noticed any. Of course, there are a few unit test failures under JDK 11, but I will be submitting a fix in a PR soon.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If we've prepared the trunk code for compatibility with JDK 17, including unit tests and CI, do we still need to release hadoop-3.4.2, or can we directly release hadoop-3.5.0 based on the trunk?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think a 3.4.2 can go out anyway, so people on java <17 can upgrade with lower risk dependency updates etc, and java8+

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I support your point of view. We indeed need to keep two versions (hadoop-3.4.2 and hadoop-3.5.0) until JDK 17 becomes stable enough.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants