so 27. 6. 2020 v 8:07 odesílatel Matthias Bläsing <[email protected]>
napsal:
>
> I think a staged approach could work (move parts of NetBeans IDE to 11
> and let the platform stay with 8),
OracleLabs IGV includes not only NetBeans Platform cluster, but also
support for Java edit/compile/debug, support for dynamic languages (right
now JavaScript, we'd welcome Python, Ruby, R too).
> but we have to see how we can
> compile for JDK8, when the whole IDE is build with JDK 11.
Jan Lahoda has enhanced javac in JDK9 with
```
--release <release>
Compile for a specific VM version. Supported targets: 6, 7, 8, 9,
10, 11
```
modifying our build scripts to use it on JDK9+ would avoid the `ByteBuffer`
& co. issues.
> In general I remember it so, that Oracle NetBeans IDE moved with the
> JDK - so when 8 was generally available, depending on JDK 8 became
> fairgame. Though that is just from my memory.
>
Oracle NetBeans policy always tried to support two latest LTS versions of
JDK as the execution environment for the NetBeans Platform and IDE.
Applying that principle to the current JDK versioning means to support JDK8
and JDK11 at least until JDK17 is out.
> From the introduction of the original mail I assume, that you wrote as
> an Oracle Labs employee and not the Committer/PMC member, it is ironic,
> that the very company, that introduced the rapid release cadence and
> massive breaking changes into the JDK and is one of the few companies,
> that don't offer open bugfix releases anymore, now stays with the
> ancient JDK8.
>
I am an OracleLabs employee, not JPG (the Oracle team that stewards Java)
employee. OracleLabs Graal Compiler vision is to deliver performance
improvements to all customers of Java just by switching the JVM. Many of
the users of Java still stay with JDK8 and as such it is logical that we
also produce GraalVM based on JDK8 and want our tools to run on such JVM.
> But in the end: the release120 branch exists, there are already patches
> in it, I know of at least one that will go in and I think there is work
> on nbjavac on the way to support JDK14 which would also be a good
> candiate. My take on this: If people care about release120 I see now
> problem creating releases from it, 12.0.1, 12.0.4, .... I'm willing to
> help if necessary.
>
Great. It is in my interest to make the LTS scheme work. I shall be able to
help as well.
-jt
