I'm guessing that all the pain of doing this will not be fully known until
Maven is Java 9-ified.
Gary
On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 10:16 AM, Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Il mar 15 ago 2017, 17:51 Gary Gregory <garydgreg...@gmail.com> ha
> scritto:
>
> > You will need the same tricks at runtime for the command line that Maven
> > might hide at build time... :-( I guess hacks like --add-modules
> ALL-SYSTEM
> > will become part of our daily grind...
> >
>
> Gary, I think you are right, scripts to launch applications will be hacked
> in the same way, at least during the transition.
> New j9 applications which do not use the classpath will not suffer from
> this problem. Anyway in order to launch a jigsaw enabled application you
> have to change the arguments passed to the jvm and so to fully migrate to
> the new j9 style a lot of work is to be done.
>
> For many developers most of the work life is bound to running maven goals.
> When I just wanted to try j9 I got into a lot of blocker issues. Now we are
> going to make the life easier to develop and test java8 applications and
> gradually switch to java9
>
> Cheers
> Enrico
>
>
> > Gary
> >
> > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 9:07 AM, Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Il mar 15 ago 2017, 00:03 Tibor Digana <tibor.dig...@googlemail.com>
> ha
> > > scritto:
> > >
> > > > I do not want to be too pessimistic but the inheritance of modules is
> > > > crucial for all the world.
> > > >
> > > > The common sense tells me that I should not release Java 9 on
> > September,
> > > > 2017 unless Java EE application servers work properly.
> > > >
> > > > This would mean that JDBC is crucial as well as JAXB for JAX-WS/RS
> and
> > > > maybe we will find out new issues which regarding for module
> > java.se.ee.
> > > >
> > > > Without waiting for JEE9 this release would be too fast.
> > > > Oracle had an ambition to align JSE9 release with JEE9 however JEE8
> has
> > > not
> > > > yet been released even if the ambition was to develop JEE9 in
> parallel
> > > with
> > > > JEE8.
> > > >
> > > > Isn't this too fast for the release of JSE9?
> > > >
> > >
> > > We are all waiting java9 and all the new features, apart from jigsaw.
> > > I think that the strong encapsulation work will make development of the
> > jdk
> > > more simple and new java releases will follow a faster pace.
> > > I am really worried about the lack of interest in defining exacly at
> > least
> > > the behaviour of most used frameworks, first of all the wrb
> > > applications/servlet world
> > >
> > > I am happy that the maven world will make it easy to switch from java8
> to
> > > java9 ad far as we can. Maybe most of developers which are using maven
> > will
> > > not see all the tricks under the hood
> > >
> > > Thank you
> > >
> > >
> > > Enrico
> > >
> > >
> > > > I understand that development parties of application servers and
> > > libraries
> > > > suppliers are slow but this still would not guarantee that there is
> no
> > > risk
> > > > that Jigsaw project made some mistake which (if happens) cannot be
> > taken
> > > > back after the final release of JSE9.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 11:23 PM, Enrico Olivelli <
> eolive...@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Il lun 14 ago 2017, 11:46 Tibor Digana <
> tibor.dig...@googlemail.com>
> > > ha
> > > > > scritto:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hello Enrico,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I fixed SUREFIRE-1403 and now Surefire works with Java 9.
> > > > > > I need an approval for the Jira SUREFIRE-1403 for you and Robert.
> > Thx
> > > > in
> > > > > > advance.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I will check as soon as I wil be back from vacation. Thank you very
> > > much.
> > > > > For me it is very important
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I have added integration tests for Failsafe plugin, added
> > > > documentation "
> > > > > > java9.md" and removed JAXB which is located in module
> > > > > *javax.xml.binding*.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *Here is a clarification on why I was unhappy with Java status
> and
> > > why
> > > > > > Surefire project could not run with Java 9 and how it was fixed:*
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Because of I used *javax.xml.binding*, plugin Failsafe did not
> run
> > in
> > > > > > Java9.
> > > > > > Reason is that module *javax.xml.binding* is however in Java API
> > but
> > > > not
> > > > > > propagated on classpath when running Maven process (different
> > > situation
> > > > > in
> > > > > > forked JVM in Surefire which is here fixed by SUREFIRE-1403).
> > > > > > This is strange and will be strange for most people, for instance
> > in
> > > > our
> > > > > > *Java
> > > > > > EE project using REST* the WildFly server has to use
> > *"--add-modules
> > > > > > ALL-SYSTEM"* in *jboss.sh* to make our applications working
> again.
> > > > > > As a solution in Surefire project I removed JAXB which was simple
> > XML
> > > > in
> > > > > my
> > > > > > case but not simple in general.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I will have to do it for several projects, or at leastleast to add
> > > > > java.se.ee, in fact many programs need JDBCTO and it is excluded
> by
> > > > > default, that is weird to me
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Someone may say that "do not use Java 9 if you do not use Jigsaw
> > > > > > modularity".
> > > > > > But there are reasons where you will use it.
> > > > > > For instance new API in Java or Java EE 9 in the future.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The main reason for migration is to keep up to date, java8 will
> soon
> > > > reach
> > > > > EOL.
> > > > > Java9 comes with many improvements that just upgrading will speed
> up
> > > most
> > > > > applications, just think about nee compat strings. New API are
> great
> > > and
> > > > > were expected from long time ago, like the new Process API....
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > I do not think that using *"--add-modules ALL-SYSTEM"* is good
> > > > principle.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Yep, new applications will be more fine tuned, the problem here is
> > only
> > > > for
> > > > > the migration
> > > > >
> > > > > As a workaround to this in Maven would be to develop *smart
> > > > > > maven-compiler-plugin* which automatically generates
> > > > *module-info.class*
> > > > > > upon import sections in Java classes and Maven dependencies.
> > > > > > Not easy I guess.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > I think this will be not feasible in general and very dangerous and
> > > > maybe I
> > > > > hope maven will never do such things
> > > > >
> > > > > Cheers
> > > > > Enrico
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 10:57 AM, Enrico Olivelli <
> > > eolive...@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Il dom 13 ago 2017, 17:31 Tibor Digana <
> > > tibor.dig...@googlemail.com>
> > > > > ha
> > > > > > > scritto:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I found an issue. JDK printed this on std/out:
> > > > > > > > WARNING: Using incubator modules: jdk.incubator.httpclient
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It hapens after my test:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > import org.junit.Test;
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > public class J9Test
> > > > > > > > {
> > > > > > > > @Test
> > > > > > > > public void testMiscellaneousAPI() throws
> > > java.sql.SQLException
> > > > > > > > {
> > > > > > > > System.out.println( "loaded class " +
> > > > > > > > java.sql.SQLException.class.getName() );
> > > > > > > > System.out.println( "loaded class " +
> > > > > > > > javax.xml.ws.Holder.class.getName() );
> > > > > > > > System.out.println( "loaded class " +
> > > > > > > > javax.xml.bind.JAXBException.class.getName() );
> > > > > > > > System.out.println( "loaded class " +
> > > > > > > > org.omg.CORBA.BAD_INV_ORDER.class.getName() );
> > > > > > > > System.out.println( "loaded class " +
> > > > > > > > javax.xml.xpath.XPath.class.getName() );
> > > > > > > > System.out.println( "java.specification.version=" +
> > > > > > > > System.getProperty( "java.specification.version" ) );
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > @Test
> > > > > > > > public void test_corba_mod() throws
> > > org.omg.CORBA.BAD_INV_ORDER
> > > > > > > > {
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > > }
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Tibor Digana <
> > > > > > > tibor.dig...@googlemail.com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > But why to add it? It's a hack. I do not use
> module-info.java
> > > and
> > > > > so
> > > > > > > > there
> > > > > > > > > is no reason to break the backwards compatibility.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > This is no more about Maven. It is about entire Java world.
> > > > > > > > > If we in Maven do it then everybody has to.
> > > > > > > > > And I am sure that the voices says that Kotlin is better
> and
> > > > Scala
> > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > better would make sense. Why to help these attempts to
> > happen?
> > > No
> > > > > > > reason!
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 5:11 PM, Gary Gregory <
> > > > > > garydgreg...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> Is there a Maven way to add ALL-SYSTEM to everything?
> Using
> > > > plugin
> > > > > > > > >> specific
> > > > > > > > >> tags like below is going to be painful.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Gary
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> On Aug 13, 2017 07:30, "Tibor Digana" <
> > tibordig...@apache.org
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> > Hi @Enrico,
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > I am very unhappy with Java 9 status and very afraid.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Tibor, thank you very much for your time and your effort.
> > > > > > > I think that we should have chimed in long time before the
> > approval
> > > > of
> > > > > > > those decisions on the jre. Now the game is over, we can only
> > > decide
> > > > > how
> > > > > > > maven users will deal with running classpath based applications
> > on
> > > > > java9.
> > > > > > > I see two approaches:
> > > > > > > 1) add a lot of tricks in every base maven plugin and make it
> > very
> > > > easy
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > transition
> > > > > > > 2) leave the complexity to developers who will add a lot of
> > > profiles
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > hacks to detect java9
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > My personal feeling is that I am very disappointed by the fact
> > the
> > > > few
> > > > > > > developers diffs not report this issues to the maven community
> > long
> > > > > time
> > > > > > > ago. I think that the java9 adoption has not been taken into
> > > account
> > > > by
> > > > > > > most developers and this will be an huge pain for the java
> > > community.
> > > > > > > I hope that Maven will help the java world to go on and to step
> > > over
> > > > > this
> > > > > > > painful transition
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I will test your patch as soon as I can
> > > > > > > Cheers
> > > > > > > Enrico
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >> > I do not like the style how Oracle has changed Java to
> Java
> > 9
> > > > and
> > > > > > > > forced
> > > > > > > > >> > all the world to use additional effort to adapt to
> Oracle
> > > > > > > activities.
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > I am facing more unhappy Java development teams with
> Java
> > 9
> > > in
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> future.
> > > > > > > > >> > For instance as I have tried to implement users wish in
> > > Maven
> > > > > > > Surefire
> > > > > > > > >> > project and invested my personal time and effort to
> adapt
> > to
> > > > > > Oracle
> > > > > > > > >> > requirements, this still does not convince me to say
> that
> > > > Java 9
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > >> ready
> > > > > > > > >> > to go.
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > This is my comment from Jira:
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > "This is not nice on Java 9 that they broke backwards
> > > > > > compatibility
> > > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > >> > force the world to use the switch to use --add-modules
> > > > > ALL-SYSTEM
> > > > > > > > >> instead
> > > > > > > > >> > of providing all modules installed in JRE. For instance,
> > > small
> > > > > JRE
> > > > > > > > >> having
> > > > > > > > >> > {{java.base}} has advantage on embedded systems and the
> > only
> > > > > > should
> > > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > >> > propagated. Big scope JRE should propagate all installed
> > > > > modules.
> > > > > > > > >> > But for me it does not make security sense and common
> > sense
> > > to
> > > > > > force
> > > > > > > > >> JRE to
> > > > > > > > >> > provide modules. It should be opposite and the
> > admin/Jenkins
> > > > > > should
> > > > > > > > >> > configure big scope JRE with selected modules propagated
> > to
> > > > Java
> > > > > > > > runtime
> > > > > > > > >> > applications.
> > > > > > > > >> > If this admin does not do that then all modules should
> be
> > > > > > available
> > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > > >> > default which is backwards compatibility for me and we
> do
> > > not
> > > > > have
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > >> > implement these stupid tricks."
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > As far as we remember Java Security, the policies can be
> > > > > > configured.
> > > > > > > > >> > I can imaging same paradigm in Jigsaw/Java 9 and then
> the
> > > > admin
> > > > > > who
> > > > > > > > has
> > > > > > > > >> > installed JDK or JRE would "switch off" some modules.
> But
> > > > > > opposite,
> > > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > >> > means the script which starts Java app currently enables
> > > "all"
> > > > > > > modules
> > > > > > > > >> is
> > > > > > > > >> > against security and against the principle of modular
> > system
> > > > > > because
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> > modules do not make sense then.
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > What makes sense to me is to enable "all java/javax"
> > modules
> > > > > > except
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > >> the
> > > > > > > > >> > "com.sun" proprietary ones by default.
> > > > > > > > >> > So yes enable them by default and please release
> specific
> > > JRE
> > > > > > > > >> installations
> > > > > > > > >> > with specific bunch of Java modules for specific use
> > cases.
> > > > > > > > >> > This means those modules in that particular release are
> > all
> > > > > > enabled
> > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > > >> > default if not configured otherwise by admin, e.g.
> > Jenkins,
> > > > > > > operation
> > > > > > > > >> > staff, etc. (do NOT mean Sun packages - never visible).
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > Here it comes. The idea that we can install small
> 5MB/JRE
> > on
> > > > > small
> > > > > > > > Linux
> > > > > > > > >> > device would be possible because Oracle would release
> such
> > > > tiny
> > > > > > JRE
> > > > > > > > >> using
> > > > > > > > >> > only "java.lang" and then another JRE installation using
> > > > > java.lang
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > >> > java.utils, and later NIO and later "java.desktop", etc.
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > Then vendors of web browsers and Linux dist would be
> happy
> > > to
> > > > > > > > integrate
> > > > > > > > >> > small JRE into and use JavaFX.
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > But now it is not possible because the modules are
> > basically
> > > > > > three:
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > java.base == 37MB
> > > > > > > > >> > java.desktop == 36MB
> > > > > > > > >> > java.xml ==20MB
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > All the other modules are pretty small but these three
> > seen
> > > in
> > > > > > > > "src.zip"
> > > > > > > > >> > make the modular system unbalanced in size and nobody
> > would
> > > > ever
> > > > > > > wish
> > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > >> > integrate them because they are still big. That means
> the
> > > > > problem
> > > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > >> > Oracle has with NIO implementation in com.sun package
> > > > propagated
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > >> > "java.util", nobody in the world care and nobody should
> > see
> > > > as a
> > > > > > > > >> problem to
> > > > > > > > >> > split "java.base" much more.
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > If splitting "java.base" happened then not certified
> JVMs
> > > > > > developed
> > > > > > > at
> > > > > > > > >> > Universities would for instance implement only
> "java.lang"
> > > and
> > > > > > embed
> > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > >> in
> > > > > > > > >> > to JVM and develop a new programming language on the top
> > of
> > > > > Java.
> > > > > > > But
> > > > > > > > >> > implementing 10 packages in java.base is an effort
> again.
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > One more thing is regarding the size of the modules.
> > > > > > > > >> > You really did not help embedded systems and
> installations
> > > of
> > > > > > > > browsers.
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 8:51 AM, Enrico Olivelli <
> > > > > > > eolive...@gmail.com
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > > I would like to share my current pom configuration
> which
> > > > lets
> > > > > me
> > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > >> > > build and test java8 apps on latest and greatest jdk9
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > This profile is activated when using jdk9.
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > This is based on a suggestion of Robert, its
> suggestion
> > > for
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> > > javadoc plugin is working great with surefire too
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > <profile>
> > > > > > > > >> > > <id>jdk9</id>
> > > > > > > > >> > > <activation>
> > > > > > > > >> > > <jdk>[9,)</jdk>
> > > > > > > > >> > > </activation>
> > > > > > > > >> > > <build>
> > > > > > > > >> > > <plugins>
> > > > > > > > >> > > <plugin>
> > > > > > > > >> > > <groupId>org.apache.maven.
> > > > > > > plugins</groupId>
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > <artifactId>maven-javadoc-plugin</artifactId>
> > > > > > > > >> > > <configuration>
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > <additionalparam>--add-modules
> > > > > > > > >> > > ALL-SYSTEM</additionalparam>
> > > > > > > > >> > > </configuration>
> > > > > > > > >> > > </plugin>
> > > > > > > > >> > > <plugin>
> > > > > > > > >> > > <groupId>org.apache.maven.
> > > > > > > plugins</groupId>
> > > > > > > > >> > > <artifactId>maven-surefire-pl
> > > > > > > > >> ugin</artifactId>
> > > > > > > > >> > > <version>2.20</version>
> > > > > > > > >> > > <configuration>
> > > > > > > > >> > > <argLine>--add-modules
> > > > > > > > >> ALL-SYSTEM</argLine>
> > > > > > > > >> > > </configuration>
> > > > > > > > >> > > </plugin>
> > > > > > > > >> > > </plugins>
> > > > > > > > >> > > </build>
> > > > > > > > >> > > </profile>
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > -- Enrico
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > 2017-04-24 19:08 GMT+02:00 Karl Heinz Marbaise <
> > > > > > khmarba...@gmx.de
> > > > > > > >:
> > > > > > > > >> > > > Hi,
> > > > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > yes I will do within this week...
> > > > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > Kind regards
> > > > > > > > >> > > > Karl Heinz Marbaise
> > > > > > > > >> > > > On 23/04/17 21:37, Enrico Olivelli wrote:
> > > > > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> > > >> Thank you Robert,
> > > > > > > > >> > > >> I saw that you have merged my patch.
> > > > > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> > > >> Is there any plan to release the new version of the
> > war
> > > > > > plugin?
> > > > > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> > > >> Enrico
> > > > > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> > > >> Il gio 13 apr 2017, 12:21 Paul Hammant <
> > > p...@hammant.org
> > > > >
> > > > > ha
> > > > > > > > >> scritto:
> > > > > > > > >> > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > > >>>>> I don't see any activity either, so my idea is
> to
> > > > > replace
> > > > > > > > >> XStream,
> > > > > > > > >> > > see
> > > > > > > > >> > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > > >>>> MWAR-397[1]
> > > > > > > > >> > > >>>>
> > > > > > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >> > > >>> Just for the record, Jörg is working through the
> > Java9
> > > > > > issues
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > >> > > XStream
> > > > > > > > >> > > >>> presently - https://github.com/x-stream/
> > > > > > > xstream/commits/master
> > > > > > > > >> > > >>>
> > > > > > > > >> > > >>> - Paul
> > > > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > ------------------------------
> > > > > > > > >> ---------
> > > > > > > > >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> dev-unsubscribe@maven.apache.
> > > org
> > > > > > > > >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > > dev-h...@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > > > >> > > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > ---------
> > > > > > > > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> > dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > > > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail:
> > > dev-h...@maven.apache.org
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> > >
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > > Cheers
> > > > > > > > > Tibor
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > > > Cheers
> > > > > > > > Tibor
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > -- Enrico Olivelli
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Cheers
> > > > > > Tibor
> > > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > -- Enrico Olivelli
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Cheers
> > > > Tibor
> > > >
> > > --
> > >
> > >
> > > -- Enrico Olivelli
> > >
> >
> --
>
>
> -- Enrico Olivelli
>
