| 19 Dec 2024 |
 jlesquembre | My question is more about the jdk derivation. Previously, it pointed to the latest JDK (LTS or not). Following that pattern, jdk should point to JDK 23, but currently points to JDK 21. Has this changed, and is it now intentionally pointing to the LTS version? | 16:35:29 |
 Tomodachi94 (they/them) | Iirc the consensus was that non-LTS versions end support quickly, so we're avoiding packaging them. @emily had opinions about this iirc | 18:58:07 |
| Tomodachi94 (they/them) | Would be good to write this down somewhere haha | 18:58:15 |
| Tomodachi94 (they/them) | Iirc the consensus was that non-LTS versions end support quickly, so we're avoiding packaging them/relying on them too heavily. @emily had opinions about this iirc | 18:59:20 |
| Tomodachi94 (they/them) | LTS was mentioned here, but this was in reference to pinning to non-LTS versions: https://matrix.to/#/#jvm:nixos.org/$RDRtYHOcrafUGoMpg3gaQTdWJ9U8QA-KvFz3EEPwT5Y | 19:00:19 |
| Tomodachi94 (they/them) | Iirc the consensus was that non-LTS versions end support quickly, so we're avoiding relying on them too heavily. @emily had opinions about this iirc | 19:00:31 |
| Tomodachi94 (they/them) | I think using latest LTS by default is the best thing to do support-wise (but keeping brand-new versions available for developers or packages needing new features would be good) | 19:06:33 |
| Tomodachi94 (they/them) | The funny thing with Java is that newer versions can compile to bytecode that is compatible with older Java versions (up to a certain limit; support in latest for compiling to Java 8 was on its way out, last I checked) | 19:27:43 |
| Tomodachi94 (they/them) | (e.g. https://stackoverflow.com/a/33483644/14508745) | 19:31:17 |
| 20 Dec 2024 |
|  Frédéric Christ changed their display name from Frédéric Christ to Frédéric Christ 🎄23.12. - 07.01.. | 13:02:59 |
|  🐰 xiaoxiangmoe joined the room. | 13:58:46 |
 nbathum | anyone else use IntelliJ IDEA and gradle? I finally got annoyed with working around the disconnect between building with wrapper and inside IDEA. | 20:38:11 |
| nbathum | since gradle.override { javaToolchains = [ pkgs.openjdk21 ]; } is nice I put a small PR up that also writes the toolchains into $out/lib/gradle/gradle.properties | 20:39:29 |
| 26 Dec 2024 |
|  nevoyu joined the room. | 01:41:08 |
| nevoyu left the room. | 01:41:56 |
|  Lorenz Leutgeb changed their display name from Lorenz Leutgeb to Lorenz Leutgeb (📞6343). | 19:33:39 |
| Lorenz Leutgeb changed their display name from Lorenz Leutgeb (📞6343) to Lorenz Leutgeb 📞6343. | 19:36:55 |
| 27 Dec 2024 |
 emily | it was pointing to the LTS before anything I did | 13:00:35 |
| emily | (it was on 21 but 22 was packaged) | 13:00:43 |
| emily | so yes I think jdk/openjdk/etc. pointing to the latest LTS is the correct move, I think it also matches what other distros generally do | 13:00:52 |
| emily | FWIW my idea was that we ship openjdk_latest as the rolling latest non-LTS version (and when a new LTS comes out openjdk = openjdk_latest until the next release) | 13:01:31 |
| emily | since pinning a specific version that goes EOL within 6 months is somewhat futile | 13:01:48 |
| emily | Fedora does this (I think they call it "rolling") | 13:01:54 |
 raboof | is there a 'typical' way to install an 'arbitrary' jdk these days? e.g., I'd like a jdk24 build. I used https://codeberg.org/raboof/nix-jabba for a while but I bet there's a better way by now :) | 14:16:49 |
| raboof | nerdsnipe 🤦 https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/368598 | 17:58:11 |
| emily | the JDK release cycle doesn't necessarily line up with the Nixpkgs one, right? | 18:05:37 |
| raboof | hmm kinda it seems (e.g. https://www.oracle.com/java/technologies/java-se-support-roadmap.html) | 18:07:59 |
| 1 Jan 2025 |
|  NixOS Moderation Botchanged room power levels. | 14:26:16 |
|  linsui joined the room. | 16:10:49 |
| linsui | I thought openjfx build has been fixed in https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/365724 but it still fails for jabref. https://hydra.nixos.org/build/282405302/nixlog/6 Is the webkit enabled openjfx not fixed? | 16:15:02 |
