Agreed. Especially, things are still moving in the JDK land and we may expect additional breakages, so I would not hold Karaf 4.1 for that. We can't really claim to support Java 9 support before it's even released ;-)
2017-01-04 13:33 GMT+01:00 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <j...@nanthrax.net>: > Hi Achim, > > For Karaf 4.1, the purpose is not to fully support JDK9 but to start the > required improvements. > > I plan to release Karaf 4.1.0 by the end of this week as it is, with full > JDK8 support, and JDK9 support preview (not fully tested). > > I would consider the full JDK9 support for Karaf 4.2. I'm pretty sure that > other projects (Pax Web as you said, but also Aries Proxy) are not fully > ready, so, it's not really possible to announce a full JDK9 support. > > My plan is to create the karaf-4.1.x branch tomorrow, and then, prepare > the full JDK9 support on master. > > Thoughts ? > > Regards > JB > > > On 01/04/2017 01:25 PM, Achim Nierbeck wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> got a question regarding Karaf 4.1 and JDK9 compatibility. >> I've seen we had numerous issues regarding JDK9 for Karaf 4.1. >> Is it our goal to have Karaf 4.1 runnable with JDK9? >> If so, the ops4j community just came across some major drawbacks. >> >> First it just seemed like we just need to bump the version for ASM in >> Pax-Web [1][2][3] and everything is smooth, but it's not. >> >> It turned out we also need another upgrade for ASM 6 in Aries [4], but >> again this isn't the only thing. >> >> It turns out, Jetty 9.3.x isn't compatible with JDK9, so an upgrade to >> Jetty 9.4 might be needed. >> Again this turns out to be more complex then first anticipated. >> As it turns out, neither Jetty 9.3 nor 9.4 are ready to go for ASM 6, but >> still rely on version 5 [5]. >> Not to speak of the need to bump Pax-Web to version 6.1 for using Jetty >> 9.4. >> >> So how do we handle JDK9 for Karaf 4.1? >> Is it our main goal to support JDK9 from head start? >> If the answer is yes, we need to do a lot more then what we've done so >> far. >> Just to mention one thing that needs to be done instantly, have a build >> which uses JDK9 to run our tests. That should already cover most of the >> issues we came across. >> Also I would like to hold back the release for 4.1 for a while to make >> sure >> we have all project we or our users depend on straightened for JDK9. >> >> >> regards, Achim >> >> [1] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-4912 >> [2] - https://ops4j1.jira.com/browse/PAXWEB-1047 >> [3] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-4913 >> [4] - https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARIES-1646 >> [5] - >> https://ops4j1.jira.com/browse/PAXWEB-1047?focusedCommentId= >> 39702&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels%3 >> Acomment-tabpanel#comment-39702 >> >> >> > -- > Jean-Baptiste Onofré > jbono...@apache.org > http://blog.nanthrax.net > Talend - http://www.talend.com > -- ------------------------ Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Red Hat, Open Source Integration Email: gno...@redhat.com Web: http://fusesource.com Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
