Skip to content

Downgrade Java version to 17 in .bazelrc#13

Merged
JamyDev merged 1 commit intouber:mainfrom
murray-stripe:patch-2
Sep 2, 2025
Merged

Downgrade Java version to 17 in .bazelrc#13
JamyDev merged 1 commit intouber:mainfrom
murray-stripe:patch-2

Conversation

@murray-stripe
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description

Java 21 is still a pretty recent version of Java and could prove to be a barrier to adoption. It looks like the project compiles and runs just fine with Java 17, so I believe we could (and should) lower this as not everyone will be on the latest LTS.

Type of Change

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)
  • Documentation update
  • Refactoring (no functional changes)
  • Performance improvement
  • Test improvement

Component(s) Affected

  • Language Server (ULSP)
  • SCIP Generation (Python utilities)
  • VS Code/Cursor Extension
  • Java Aggregator
  • Build System (Bazel)
  • Documentation
  • Tests

Testing

  • I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my feature works
  • New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes (bazel test //...)
  • I have tested this manually with a real project

Manual Testing Details

Describe how you tested these changes:

  • IDE used for testing: VS Code
  • Project(s) tested against: company internal repository
  • Specific features/scenarios verified: scip index file generation

Checklist

  • My code follows the existing code style and conventions
  • I have performed a self-review of my own code
  • I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
  • I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
  • I have updated BUILD.bazel files if I added new source files
  • My changes generate no new warnings
  • Any dependent changes have been merged and published

Screenshots/Logs (if applicable)

Include any relevant screenshots, logs, or output that demonstrates the changes.

Related Issues

Fixes #(issue number)
Closes #(issue number)
Related to #(issue number)

Additional Notes

Any additional information that reviewers should know about this PR.

Java 21 is still a pretty recent version of Java and could prove to be a barrier to adoption. It looks like the project compiles and runs just fine with Java 17, so I believe we could (and should) lower this as not everyone will be on the latest LTS.
@CLAassistant
Copy link
Copy Markdown

CLAassistant commented Aug 28, 2025

CLA assistant check
All committers have signed the CLA.

@JamyDev JamyDev merged commit 513af7a into uber:main Sep 2, 2025
4 checks passed
JamyDev pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Sep 8, 2025
## Description

A follow-up to #13. This PR changes the Java language level flags
defined in `scip_const.py` (as part of the bsp_server) from 21 to 17, to
remain consistent with the values defined in `.bazelrc`.

## Type of Change

- [x] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
- [ ] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
- [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing
functionality to not work as expected)
- [ ] Documentation update
- [ ] Refactoring (no functional changes)
- [ ] Performance improvement
- [x] Test improvement

## Component(s) Affected

- [ ] Language Server (ULSP)
- [x] SCIP Generation (Python utilities)
- [ ] VS Code/Cursor Extension
- [ ] Java Aggregator
- [ ] Build System (Bazel)
- [ ] Documentation
- [ ] Tests

## Testing

- [ ] I have added tests that prove my fix is effective or that my
feature works
- [x] New and existing unit tests pass locally with my changes (`bazel
test //...`) (<sup>**</sup>see comment)
- [x] I have tested this manually with a real project

### Manual Testing Details

Describe how you tested these changes:
- IDE used for testing: VS Code
- Project(s) tested against: Internal company project
- Specific features/scenarios verified: run `scip_sync.py` both for a
"full" sync an an incremental sync.

## Checklist

- [x] My code follows the existing code style and conventions
- [x] I have performed a self-review of my own code
- [ ] I have commented my code, particularly in hard-to-understand areas
- [ ] I have made corresponding changes to the documentation
- [ ] I have updated BUILD.bazel files if I added new source files
- [x] My changes generate no new warnings
- [x] Any dependent changes have been merged and published

## Screenshots/Logs (if applicable)

Include any relevant screenshots, logs, or output that demonstrates the
changes.

## Related Issues

Fixes #(issue number)
Closes #(issue number)
Related to #(issue number)

## Additional Notes

Any additional information that reviewers should know about this PR.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants