Migrate to Java 11

[jonahgraham]

Lets migrate to Java 11.

Any objections?

[cdietrich]

is the current release 3.16 complete or is there still something missing?
i am not sure if we at Xtext already want to ditch Java 8 too.
maybe source 11 target 8 could be an option?

[rgrunber]

JDT-LS made Java 11 a requirement a while ago (I believe due to Platform switching), and you can see much of the reaction to that at https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=redhat.java&ssr=false#review-details .

Not saying you should continue to support it despite difficulties, but if the work required to continue supporting is minimal it would reduce such complaints.

[mickaelistria]

if the work required to continue supporting is minimal it would reduce such complaints.

I don't imagine end-users would typically complain about LSP4J version, it's an internal detail for them. So it's more about whether some LSP4J-based clients or server do care enough about Java 8 to make it still worth being supported.
I don't think any form of complaints is worth keeping support for Java 8; unless those complaints are backed by contributions to match them.
Java 8 support already did cost me about 20minutes + some CI cycles + probably 15 to 20 minutes to Jonah to figure out my mistake, and maybe more unnoticed more. I am personally not caring about Java 8 so this was pure loss to me, so if people care about Java 8 for LSP4J enough, I'd like their address to send them the bill of extra time Java 8 has cost today ;)

[jonahgraham]

is the current release 3.16 complete or is there still something missing?

If I am reading between the lines correctly - do you recommend calling 3.16 done done before moving to Java 11. That is fine to me.

i am not sure if we at Xtext already want to ditch Java 8 too.

If Xtext moved that would signal 100% that LSP4J should move. Xtext has much wider user base AFAICT, many of them using it for years before LSP4J's existence.

maybe source 11 target 8 could be an option?

I don't think so - what spurred this today was using new library methods (specifically List.of today).

[jonahgraham]

JDT-LS made Java 11 a requirement a while ago (I believe due to Platform switching), and you can see much of the reaction to that at https://marketplace.visualstudio.com/items?itemName=redhat.java&ssr=false#review-details .

That was a depressing read. Although it looked a lot like the hate when changing from Java 7 to 8. Nice to see some positive comments in there too.

Not saying you should continue to support it despite difficulties, but if the work required to continue supporting is minimal it would reduce such complaints.

I am 100% behind dropping Java 8 support. However I don't know how to reach the community of adopters before release. LSP4J doesn't have "users" in the sense of the extension point, yet I don't know how to reach those folks (as recently seen with #536 (comment))

Thanks for the feedback.

[spoenemann]

Seems good to me to make Java 11 a requirement.

[apupier]

I think it is fine to move to Java 11. A lot of other projects are already requiring it. Java 17 has been released, so we already have 2 other Java LTS interesting to support.

On personal side, the next release of Camel Language Server which is based on LSP4J will require Java 11.

So that's a +1 from me.

[jonahgraham]

Thanks everyone for the feedback. I guess when we do the next release it will be Java 11 then.

[ice1000]

I wish this to happen! Just FYI, IntelliJ IDEA started using Java 11 source language level a long time ago.

I really wish lsp4j to support JPMS (the module system) so we can use jlink on lsp4j!!