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

update travis to trusty #799

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Oct 11, 2019
Merged

update travis to trusty #799

merged 1 commit into from Oct 11, 2019

Conversation

codyoss
Copy link
Member

@codyoss codyoss commented Oct 8, 2019

Fixes: #793

@googlebot googlebot added the cla: yes label Oct 8, 2019
@codyoss
Copy link
Member Author

@codyoss codyoss commented Oct 8, 2019

We could use trusty and drop support for oraclejdk7
https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/precise-to-trusty-migration-guide#oracle-jdk-7-availability

Log from xenial

Expected feature release number in range of 9 to 14, but got: 7

@elharo thoughts?

@elharo
Copy link
Contributor

@elharo elharo commented Oct 8, 2019

If we use openjdk7, that's good enough. We don't want to drop support for Java 7 completely.

@elharo
Copy link
Contributor

@elharo elharo commented Oct 8, 2019

Trusty probably works better than xenial for now.

Switching to test only against OpenJDK as support in travis has
shifted.

Fixes: googleapis#793
@codyoss codyoss changed the title update travis to xenial update travis to trusty Oct 8, 2019
@codecov
Copy link

@codecov codecov bot commented Oct 8, 2019

Codecov Report

Merging #799 into master will not change coverage.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##             master     #799   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     78.39%   78.39%           
  Complexity     1106     1106           
=========================================
  Files           198      198           
  Lines          4887     4887           
  Branches        385      385           
=========================================
  Hits           3831     3831           
  Misses          887      887           
  Partials        169      169

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 664f671...3ce040e. Read the comment docs.

@codyoss codyoss requested review from elharo and vam-google Oct 8, 2019
language: java
addons:
# https://github.com/travis-ci/travis-ci/issues/5227#issuecomment-165131913
hosts:
- fake-hostname-to-work-around-travis-bug
hostname: fake-hostname-to-work-around-travis-bug
jdk:
- oraclejdk8
- oraclejdk7
- openjdk8
Copy link
Contributor

@vam-google vam-google Oct 11, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This removes removes Oracle's JDKs from tests completely. Why do we have to do it?

Not having Oracle SDKs tested at all seems too much. Can we manually download it as part of test script and still test?

It seems like we should just drop java 7 support at this point. Supporting it makes less and less sense.

@vam-google
Copy link
Contributor

@vam-google vam-google commented Oct 11, 2019

@elharo Why do we still want to support Java 7? It seem like it is getting banned from everywhere to the extent that it is even problematic to setup a test infrastructure where java 7 is allowed.

@elharo
Copy link
Contributor

@elharo elharo commented Oct 11, 2019

We want it because we have paying customers that use it, and it's still a supported environment for App Engine. One year I'm sure we'll drop it, but that's a much bigger discussion to be had.

elharo
elharo approved these changes Oct 11, 2019
@codyoss codyoss merged commit 76a844c into googleapis:master Oct 11, 2019
5 checks passed
@codyoss codyoss deleted the travis-upgrade branch Oct 11, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
cla: yes
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants