Java Libs Project requires Java 1.8, but uses packages introduced in Java 11

[alecdesjardins]

Bug Report

Description

java.net.http was introduced to Java with 11, not 1.8. Therefore, the java libs project will not compile.

I tried this code:

./gradlew build

I expected to see this happen: build successfully

Instead, this happened: Webhook.java:3 error: package java.net.http does not exist import java.net.http.HttpHeaders;

[jameshiew]

I'm able to import and use the library in a Java 8 project to interact with the Svix webhook service API in general, but can't use this Webhook class. This looks to be the only application code which is using Java 11+ features (e.g. java.net.http.HttpHeaders class).

svix-webhooks/java/lib/src/main/java/com/svix/Webhook.java

Lines 43 to 56 in 58689c8

	public void verify(final String payload, final HttpHeaders headers) throws WebhookVerificationException {
	Optional<String> msgId = headers.firstValue(SVIX_MSG_ID_KEY);
	Optional<String> msgSignature = headers.firstValue(SVIX_MSG_SIGNATURE_KEY);
	Optional<String> msgTimestamp = headers.firstValue(SVIX_MSG_TIMESTAMP_KEY);
	if (msgId.isEmpty() || msgSignature.isEmpty() || msgTimestamp.isEmpty()) {
	// fallback to unbranded
	msgId = headers.firstValue(UNBRANDED_MSG_ID_KEY);
	msgSignature = headers.firstValue(UNBRANDED_MSG_SIGNATURE_KEY);
	msgTimestamp = headers.firstValue(UNBRANDED_MSG_TIMESTAMP_KEY);
	if (msgId.isEmpty() || msgSignature.isEmpty() || msgTimestamp.isEmpty()) {
	throw new WebhookVerificationException("Missing required headers");
	}
	}

Could potentially either bump the minimum supported Java version to 11, or update this class and tests to be Java 8 compatible - though unsure of what would be the best way to do that without affecting existing downstream users of the verify() method.

[tasn]

I believe this is now fixed?

[desjardinsalec]

@tasn who knows, I gave up on this project awhile ago.

[tasn]

@desjardinsalec, oh, sorry to hear, why? This PR or something else? We would love to get feedback.

[desjardinsalec]

@tasn Yeah inactivity from a valid issue, never a good sign.

[tasn]

Gotcha, sorry to hear about your experience. :(

We definitely messed up here by not addressing it earlier / communicating poorly, though I don't believe "inactivity from a valid issue" was a fair characterization of the issue.
Java 1.8 was long EOL when this ticket was opened (it's EOL since 2019), and Java 11 was out for 5 years at that point. This means this only didn't work for people using a deprecated version of Java. While it does suck for those still using this version, there were workarounds (not using the SDKs, upgrading your Java to a non-deprecated version etc.); so it's not like it was a major blocker for anyone, or if it was we weren't aware of it.

Sorry again for the trouble, and I really wish we had communicated better here.