Yes, just to be clear: I would like to remove lib/jdk9plus, and provide spec features "only".
Regards JB > Le 5 mars 2020 à 10:57, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > +1, jdk9plus should disappear to make karaf frictionless IMHO > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog > <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog > <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | > LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book > <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> > > > Le jeu. 5 mars 2020 à 10:13, Jean-Baptiste Onofre <j...@nanthrax.net> a > écrit : > >> Hi guys, >> >> Several users reported issues with JDK 9+ about spec packages. >> >> Users are struggling about spec packages since JDK 9+ and "classic" >> questions are: >> >> - who’s provide the package ? >> - should I use spec bundles and where they are located ? >> - should I change bin/karaf to use —add-module ? >> - should I use lib/jdk9plus and update etc/jre.properties ? >> >> IMHO, the always preferred approach should be spec bundles. >> >> To improve users experience with JDK9+, I would like to create a new >> features repository: spec. >> This features repository XML will provide spec feature (JAXB, JAXP, …) >> that other projects and users can leverage. >> It would reduce the coupling with JDK packages and a straight forward >> usage. >> >> Thoughts ? >> >> Regards >> JB
