Hi Simon,

Simon Spero wrote:

> 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.]
> 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]

OK, that means we should at least test those releases that contain a Module 
name now and silently assume, that the other stuff is not necessarily 
compatible. Do we have an overview, which components were released with such 
a name?


BWT: I am also not convinced by the benefits of Java 9 looking at the module 
system or the multi-version jars. I fear they will rather harm the Java 

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Reply via email to