In case anyone else's email broke the thread, below is a link to the previous thread in the mail archive for context.
https://markmail.org/thread/xt224pvavxu3d54p On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 9:35 AM, Jinmei Liao <jil...@pivotal.io> wrote: > We will need to wrap up this discussion with a decision. Looks like we are > skeptical about #4, and it's proven to work with #3 since our current jdk11 > pipeline is green with this approach. > > Can I propose we do #3 and document the extra configuration needed for > jdk11 for now and then work towards #1 and #2? > > Here is the extra configuration to the jvm that are need to run geode under > jdk11: > > --add-opens=jdk.management/com.sun.management.internal=ALL-UNNAMED" > --add-opens=java.xml/jdk.xml.internal=ALL-UNNAMED" > --add-opens=java.base/jdk.internal.module=ALL-UNNAMED" > --add-opens=java.base/java.lang.module=ALL-UNNAMED" > > comments? votes? > > Thanks! > > On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 10:20 AM Sai Boorlagadda < > sai.boorlaga...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >Do we know what third party libraries are using java internals that >we > > might > > have problems with? #2 isn't going to work for those >libraries, unless > > they also add a module-info.class. So maybe we >will need to do #3 for > > third-party libraries? > > > > Adding these third-party libs on module path[1] rather than class path > > seems to address this issue. > > > > [1] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jigsaw/spec/sotms/# > automatic-modules > > > > > -- > Cheers > > Jinmei >
