-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 961
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
Feature: JDK22 #3435
Feature: JDK22 #3435
Conversation
Note: dependency bumps regarding jdk22 compatiblilty are missing!
(dammn you unflexible launchpad!)
WalkthroughThe recent updates primarily involve upgrading the Java version from 21 to 22 across multiple GitHub Actions workflow files. Additionally, the Changes
Assessment against linked issues
Thank you for using CodeRabbit. We offer it for free to the OSS community and would appreciate your support in helping us grow. If you find it useful, would you consider giving us a shout-out on your favorite social media? TipsChatThere are 3 ways to chat with CodeRabbit:
Note: Be mindful of the bot's finite context window. It's strongly recommended to break down tasks such as reading entire modules into smaller chunks. For a focused discussion, use review comments to chat about specific files and their changes, instead of using the PR comments. CodeRabbit Commands (invoked as PR comments)
Additionally, you can add CodeRabbit Configration File (
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks alright
@@ -23,7 +23,7 @@ on: | |||
|
|||
env: | |||
JAVA_DIST: 'zulu' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
out of scope, but shouldn't we use the same JDK vendor for all our workflows?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
We should use the same JDK for all flows building release artifacts.
I think it is not necessary to stick to this rule for all workflows.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actionable comments posted: 1
Review Details
Configuration used: CodeRabbit UI
Review profile: CHILL
Files ignored due to path filters (6)
dist/linux/appimage/build.sh
is excluded by!dist/**
,!dist/**
dist/linux/debian/control
is excluded by!dist/**
,!dist/**
dist/linux/debian/rules
is excluded by!dist/**
,!dist/**
dist/mac/dmg/build.sh
is excluded by!dist/**
,!dist/**
dist/win/build.ps1
is excluded by!dist/**
,!dist/**
pom.xml
is excluded by!**/*.xml
Files selected for processing (12)
- .github/workflows/appimage.yml (2 hunks)
- .github/workflows/build.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/check-jdk-updates.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/debian.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/dependency-check.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/get-version.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/mac-dmg.yml (2 hunks)
- .github/workflows/pullrequest.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/release-check.yml (1 hunks)
- .github/workflows/win-exe.yml (2 hunks)
- .idea/misc.xml (1 hunks)
- src/main/java/module-info.java (1 hunks)
Files skipped from review due to trivial changes (10)
- .github/workflows/build.yml
- .github/workflows/check-jdk-updates.yml
- .github/workflows/debian.yml
- .github/workflows/dependency-check.yml
- .github/workflows/get-version.yml
- .github/workflows/mac-dmg.yml
- .github/workflows/pullrequest.yml
- .github/workflows/release-check.yml
- .idea/misc.xml
- src/main/java/module-info.java
Additional comments not posted (3)
.github/workflows/appimage.yml (2)
14-14
: Updated Java version to '22.0.1+8' aligns with the PR's objective to upgrade to JDK 22.
83-83
: Removal ofjdk.crypto.ec
fromjlink
command aligns with JDK 22 changes where this module is part ofjava.base
..github/workflows/win-exe.yml (1)
19-19
: Updated Java version to '22.0.1+8' aligns with the PR's objective to upgrade to JDK 22.
This PR updates the project to use/require JDK 22.
Fixes #3376 and #3382.
I did not remove the --enable-preview flag, since i'm not sure if we already use the String template processors somewhere.