Compress HEAD is tested against the equivalent of RC. The main issues were
with tests; some types of mocking (especially of concrete classes) don't
work. This might have been fixed by now.
I believe that the latest jacoco is 9 compatible.

[The biggest problem was caused by a bug in the zip code handling a
particular kind of timestamp; massive changes to the jdk implementation of
zip caused tests that had been passing (but shouldn't have) to fail
properly.]

NOTE:

Adding a Module name manifest header asserts that the code is tested
against Java 9. This is documented in the minutes of the armistice talks.

jigsaw modules are pretty useless for most of Commons (consumers pretty
much have to shade dependencies). [ subliminal whisper about benefits of
having correct OSGI headers]

Simon

On Aug 8, 2017 11:08 AM, "Jörg Schaible" <joerg.schai...@bpm-inspire.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Gilles wrote:
>
> > Hi.
> >
> > On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 11:09:01 +0100, Rory O'Donnell wrote:
> >> Hi Benedikt,
> >>
> >> Thank you very much for all your testing of JDK 9 during its
> >> development! Such contributions have significantly helped shape and
> >> improve JDK 9.
> >>
> >> Now that we have reached the JDK 9 Final Release Candidate phase [1]
> >> , I would like to ask if your project can be considered to be 'ready
> >> for JDK 9',
> >
> > Is there some simple thing to do in order to be able to answer
> > that question?
>
> IMHO no. Definitelly not in general for all components. Practically we
> would
> have to checkout the latest releases from source (or use the source
> tarballs) and run at least the unit tests with this Java 9 RC.
>
> Cheers,
> Jörg
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>

Reply via email to