Well I don’t necessarily agree about anyone moving to Java 9 anytime soon. I’m beginning to see companies do it, albeit small companies/start ups… but they are moving.
I think the necessity for moving to JDK 9 is the modules. We should think about making the jars not only OSGi compliant, but able to work with Jigsaw. I think more and more people will be moving to that since it has become a part of the JVM. Just my ,02. Jeff > On Nov 16, 2017, at 9:58 AM, Daniel Kulp <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I’d much rather keep master a “8+9” type of thing for a while. I don’t see > ANYONE moving to Java 9 for production stuff any time soon. > > That said, at some point soon, I’d like to make master more “Java 9 Friendly” > and hopefully release a 3.3 at some point in the future that supports java8, > but may be more friendly for Java9. Not 100% sure what that would entail, > but I would definitely be open to the idea of releases being done with Java9 > that would allow additional modules for Java9 users. > > It’s kind of similar to how we moved from JAX-WS 2.1 to 2.2. Until we went > Java7 only, we had a separate profile that added additional src directories > and such for JAX-WS 2.2. On Java 5/6, we had to do JAX-WS 2.1 so the code > in the normal src/main/java directories was all Java5/6 with JAX-WS 2.1. > However, we had a separate src/man/jaxws22 source directory that contained > the additional classes and such that were needed for JAX-WS 2.2. At release > time, we had to make sure we used the appropriate JDK/Profile to get that > included. > > Now, what does “Java 9 Friendly” entail? Not really sure. Off the top of > my head, I would definitely start by including dependencies for all the > javax.* API’s. Example, core depends on JAXB so add the jaxb-api jar. > This would definitely reduce the amount of “patch-module” things that are > needed to use CXF on Java9. However, it’s not something to do on 3.2.x as > it adds a ton of dependencies that users may need/want to exclude so not a > “patch” thing. As part of this, we’d also update to as many dependencies > that are module friendly as possible. We could also have additional > source dirs or similar to the tree for Java 9 “cool things”, providing we can > still compile with —target=1.8. Another example could possibly be an > update to the http client transport to use the Java9 HttpClient. If run on > Java8, we’d stick with URLConnection, on Java9, use HttpClient. > > I know Java9 supports the “Multi-Release JAR”, but I’m not sure if Maven can > handle/generate those yet. Something else to look into. > > Dan > > > > >> On Nov 15, 2017, at 6:47 AM, Sergey Beryozkin <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi >> >> Should we open a new Java 9 only master soon enough ? >> >> Thanks, Sergey > > -- > Daniel Kulp > [email protected] - http://dankulp.com/blog > Talend Community Coder - http://coders.talend.com >
