I agree with this statement: "it seems like the clearest win is to move all the way to Java11, though continue to target java 8 releases, and test on all JREs up until current."
On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 10:21 PM 'Goktug Gokdogan' via GWT Contributors < [email protected]> wrote: > wrt running tests: > See https://gwt-review.googlesource.com/c/gwt/+/13861 for the pattern > used in JRE earlier; and the CI was updated to run in both 7 and 8 at the > same time. > > PS: Compiler tests ("jjs.test.Java8Test") was different because we really > needed to run the compiler tests with new syntax inside Google which didn't > have the Java8 VM at the time. It wasn't a deal breaker to be not able run > Java8 JRE tests at the time so they are not super sourced. > > I recommend the same approach. > > > On Mon, Jun 29, 2020 at 6:45 PM Colin Alworth <[email protected]> wrote: > >> As of somewhere in the time leading up to the GWT 2.9.0 release, it is no >> longer possible to build GWT with Java7, and similarly the decision was >> made to no longer officially support running on Java7 >> (jsinterop-annotations use of "TYPE_USE", newer jetty version too I >> believe). >> >> There is still some defunct wiring in the build to handle Java 7 vs Java >> 8 though, mostly with regards to running tests - since we first javac our >> java classes, and then run gwtc on them, we need to make sure that the java >> version being use can correctly compile those tests. >> >> The issue https://github.com/gwtproject/gwt/issues/9683 is tracking some >> of the existing work on this: the main remaining piece is to decide how to >> handle javadoc. GWT has its own custom doclet to handle a few custom tags, >> "example", "gwt.include", and "tip". None of this compiles after Java 8, >> since Java 9 came with a new, incompatible API to build custom tags, so >> either we drop Java 8 support for building the toolkit, require _only_ Java >> 8 to build, support two parallel copies of the custom doc wiring, or drop >> the doc wiring entirely and remove these custom tags throughout the >> codebase. >> >> Since the release of GWT 2.9 and my own work on the above ticket, I've >> been picking back up some Java 9/10/11 JRE emulation work that I had >> previously paused, and I'm running into the issue described at the top - if >> you write a test that calls Map.of() and run it on Java8 as a GWTTestCase, >> you'll get a compile error. >> >> Two basic ways I can easily see to fix this: we can make two copies of >> each test, one as an empty "real" java type and one as supersource, or we >> can guard those tests behind java version args in the build glue like we >> did for Java7 vs Java8. The first option is clunky, and while I see this >> was done for `com.google.gwt.dev.jjs.test.Java8Test`, it clearly wasn't >> done for JRE emulation tests, and I assume there was a reason for that. The >> second option requires changing our CI to build+test on some new JRE... >> >> ...and given the constraints of the Java LTS system, and the java 8/9 >> divide for custom doclet stuff, it seems like the clearest win is to move >> all the way to Java11, though continue to target java 8 releases, and test >> on all JREs up until current. >> >> So that's my pitch. For completeness, some other options that seem >> workable, keeping in mind that at present there are about 3 important JRE >> versions to support well: Java 8, Java 11, and the current stable release. >> * Require Java8 for javadoc, supersource tests >> * Allow any JRE 8+, use ant filters for tests for each version, maintain >> two javadoc builds >> * Allow any JRE 8+, use ant filters, only actually produce javadoc on >> java9+ builds >> >> Other technical ways to deal with this, or have a missed an easier >> solution to one of these problems? >> >> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups >> "GWT Contributors" group. >> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an >> email to [email protected]. >> To view this discussion on the web visit >> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/0aa0701b-4287-4e4c-bbef-23952898c64an%40googlegroups.com >> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/0aa0701b-4287-4e4c-bbef-23952898c64an%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >> . >> > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "GWT Contributors" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CAN%3DyUA1L4gAaaEkqgWnqL%3DiKDX_aUjX1L0WThdG4yuxUyHdQMQ%40mail.gmail.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CAN%3DyUA1L4gAaaEkqgWnqL%3DiKDX_aUjX1L0WThdG4yuxUyHdQMQ%40mail.gmail.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT Contributors" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/CAKAo3tTpuZW9tRCv-GFXPF8suvpeOJ4fJZQmB%2BpgZj2PGc7_bA%40mail.gmail.com.
