GH-38996: [Java] Update dependencies and plugins for JPMS modules

[jduo]

Rationale for this change

Update dependencies and plugins to versions that work correctly with JPMS modules.

What changes are included in this PR?

• Update several plugins to use module-enabled versions:
  • maven-compiler-plugin is updated to 3.11.0
  • maven-shade-plugin is updated to 3.2.4
  • maven-dependency-plugin is updated to 3.1.2
  • CycloneDX is updated to 2.7.10
• Update grpc-java to 1.59 for module support
• Update jackson to 2.16.0 as 2.15.1 had corrupt module-info.class files that broke module support.

Are these changes tested?

Existing tests only

Are there any user-facing changes?

Users may need to update their own dependencies if they have the same ones.

• Closes: [Java] Update dependencies and plugins for JPMS module support #38996

[github-actions]

Thanks for opening a pull request!

If this is not a minor PR. Could you open an issue for this pull request on GitHub? https:/apache/arrow/issues/new/choose

Opening GitHub issues ahead of time contributes to the Openness of the Apache Arrow project.

Then could you also rename the pull request title in the following format?

GH-${GITHUB_ISSUE_ID}: [${COMPONENT}] ${SUMMARY}

or

MINOR: [${COMPONENT}] ${SUMMARY}

In the case of PARQUET issues on JIRA the title also supports:

PARQUET-${JIRA_ISSUE_ID}: [${COMPONENT}] ${SUMMARY}

See also:

• Other pull requests
• Contribution Guidelines - How to contribute patches

[kou]

Could you open a new issue to share what you're working on to the community before you create a PR?
It's for The Apache Way's Openess part: https://theapacheway.com/open/

[github-actions]

⚠️ GitHub issue #38996 has been automatically assigned in GitHub to PR creator.

[jduo]

Could you open a new issue to share what you're working on to the community before you create a PR? It's for The Apache Way's Openess part: https://theapacheway.com/open/

@kou , I've opened #38996 for this.

Note that this is one of a series of issues around JPMS. The overall issue is #38915 .

[danepitkin]

LGTM

[conbench-apache-arrow]

After merging your PR, Conbench analyzed the 5 benchmarking runs that have been run so far on merge-commit 63bd0d5.

There were no benchmark performance regressions. 🎉

The full Conbench report has more details.