[ci] test on Java 11

[line-o]

Description:

Test on Java 11

Reference:

Type of tests:

[dizzzz]

afaik / have seen, java11 causes an issue runtime (tar.gz) due to a signing issue/inconsistency. Only one jar file has this issue.

[adamretter]

Be aware, eXist-db 6 is significantly less performant on JDK 11 than on JDK 8.

[reinhapa]

Be aware, eXist-db 6 is significantly less performant on JDK 11 than on JDK 8.

@adamretter unfortunately JDK 8 is no longer available for the Mac OS Github action...

[adamretter]

@adamretter unfortunately JDK 8 is no longer available for the Mac OS Github action...

Is it not possible to have a step that install a JDK? If I recall there is even a pre-build step for this in the GitHub Marketplace that can be used

[dizzzz]

Be aware, eXist-db 6 is significantly less performant on JDK 11 than on JDK 8.

I was not aware of that..... or maybe I am. Any idea why?

[reinhapa]

Be aware, eXist-db 6 is significantly less performant on JDK 11 than on JDK 8.

I was not aware of that..... or maybe I am. Any idea why?

I just ask myself on how much effort are we willing to invest into that branch or should we try getting the next version out of the door?

[line-o]

Runtime of tests was reasonable between 19 to 27 minutes for the entire test suite on java 11.
If there is a known slow-down of exist-db on java 11 I would like to see an issue with some more details to be shared.
I would also like to add that we do use the java setup action.

In order for us to make sure that the existdb compiles and runs on java 8 as well we could add a separate test on java8 on linux workflow. How does that sound?

[adamretter]

I don't understand the point of this. eXist-db 6 targets Java 8, so changing CI to Java 11 makes no sense

[reinhapa]

I don't understand the point of this. eXist-db 6 targets Java 8, so changing CI to Java 11 makes no sense

@adamretter I think using Java 11 to produce Java 8 byte code should be still ok instead of having investing a lot of time to handle an alternative Java setup instead. I think it would be better to consentrate on the next release instead and not wasting to much time in doing work-arounds for no longer supported build JDKs IMHO...

[dizzzz]

https://github.com/marketplace/actions/maven-jdk8-for-monorepo-projects ?

[dizzzz]

I read/hear that the performance decline of java11 has been addresses in the JDK some time ago.