Hi All,
With https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10757 we have getting closer
to use https://adoptopenjdk.net/releases.html which seems stable so far.
At OFBIZ-10757 we discussed about moving not only trunk but also not yet
released R17 and R18 to Java 11.
Note that current changes do
+1
Jacques
Le 13/02/2019 à 12:51, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
Hi Michael,
yes AdoptOpenJDK is definitely a good fit.
Jacopo
On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 12:39 PM Michael Brohl
wrote:
Hi Jacopo,
an alternative would be https://adoptopenjdk.net/ which provides
prebuild packages. The scripts for
I agree with Taher, We should upgrade to openJDK and I think with the small
code change we can upgrade to openJDK
Kind Regards,
Deepak Dixit
On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 5:21 PM Taher Alkhateeb
wrote:
> I think it would be great to upgrade to JDK 11 on openjdk and get this
> issue over with. For t
On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 12:51 PM Taher Alkhateeb
wrote:
> [...] For those who want to switch to oracle JDK, they can
> easily do so, but we should perhaps stabilize on openjdk by default
> and get the build system and documentation pointing to openjdk as a
> long term solution to this problem.
Hi Michael,
yes AdoptOpenJDK is definitely a good fit.
Jacopo
On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 12:39 PM Michael Brohl
wrote:
> Hi Jacopo,
>
> an alternative would be https://adoptopenjdk.net/ which provides
> prebuild packages. The scripts for package building are Apache 2.0
> licensed and they are pro
I think it would be great to upgrade to JDK 11 on openjdk and get this
issue over with. For those who want to switch to oracle JDK, they can
easily do so, but we should perhaps stabilize on openjdk by default
and get the build system and documentation pointing to openjdk as a
long term solution to
Hi Jacopo,
an alternative would be https://adoptopenjdk.net/ which provides
prebuild packages. The scripts for package building are Apache 2.0
licensed and they are providing Java 8 and 11 LTS versions.
Seems a good fit to me.
Since Java 8 is LTS there, we do not necessarily have to upgrade
Considering that now Oracle JDKs are no more free for commercial use, I
think that as a community we should make it a priority to suggest a
different Java build in the README and other public documents.
The simplest alternative (because it is the closest to Oracle JDK) is the
Open JDK 11 maintained
Answering my last question.
>From the download page for Oracle JDK 11, demo purpose is allowed.
On 2018/10/24 07:38:19, James Yong wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> Will the release model and licensing changes impact our demos hosted with
> Apache Software Foundation?
>
> Regards,
> James
>
> On 2018/10
Hi all,
Will the release model and licensing changes impact our demos hosted with
Apache Software Foundation?
Regards,
James
On 2018/10/24 06:54:05, James Yong wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> OFBiz can be used as an application framework and not all business use-case
> justify the yearly price-tag of
Hi all,
OFBiz can be used as an application framework and not all business use-case
justify the yearly price-tag of Oracle JDK. Given that more products(1) are
moving to support OpenJDK, should OFBiz follow?
Regards,
James
(1) See plan of Atlasians product to support OpenJDK
https://community.
Hi Michael,
How (by which mean) do you envision to "actively inform users about our
roadmap", blog, wiki or embedded documentation?
It seems the blog is not reaching all our users (needs attention). Maybe an
initial statement could be used there though.
The wiki is slowly deprecating in favou
For what it's worth (nobody here knows me), +1 for OpenJDK.
- Original Message -From: Taher Alkhateeb
To: OFBIZ Development Mailing List
Sent: Sat, 28 Jul 2018 08:06:44 - (UTC)Subject: Re:
Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
I am beginning to w
Hi Mathieu,
my goal is to actively inform users about our roadmap and provide
information on how the project will deal with the new Java release
model. Users testing OFBiz for their needs in a professional environment
also check if a project has answers to these questions so I am wrapping
my
Hello Michael,
Michael Brohl writes:
> a quick heads up for this topic.
>
> After following the release strategy and thinking more about it, I
> think that most users will go with a subscription model and subscribe
> for an LTS version. The costs are moderate [1] and I assume that few
> users wi
Hi Taher,
I would prefer if you start a new thread for this because it's a
complete new topic.
If it turns out that the community wants to work on a Java 11 update, I
would file an umbrella task for it and your issue OFBIZ-9972 would be a
sub-task (not the only one I think) of this.
Thanks
I see. well this means we have to do multiple things:
- First we need to upgrade gradle
- I have no preference with release 17 Java version support
Now the problem with upgrading gradle in a nutshell is that you can no
longer have spaces in server commands. So ./gradlew "ofbiz --start"
will not w
Because OpenJDK is the base for the Oracle JDK and Oracle is working on
Open JDK, I assume we will have the same problems. It can also be that
the two will be one product soon. Why should Oracle support Open JDK
with long term updates for free?
I did not find a clear roadmap for Open JDK so i
I am beginning to wonder if we should consider moving to OpenJDK. I think I
really dislike this release model with all the extra costs and headache
involved.
Are we stuck with Oracle JDK? Does anyone know of limitations or problems
with OpenJDK? I vaguely remember font problems with the BIRT plugi
Hi devs,
a quick heads up for this topic.
After following the release strategy and thinking more about it, I think
that most users will go with a subscription model and subscribe for an
LTS version. The costs are moderate [1] and I assume that few users will
go through a repeating 6 month "ea
BTW Java 10 is available today http://jdk.java.net/10/
Le 22/03/2018 à 06:26, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
Thanks Michael,
Quite illuminating, I'd tend to wait for Java 11 (only 6 months from now) So it seems we will need to replace Java EE by Eclipse Jakarta, not sure
when yet, I guess before m
Thanks Michael,
Quite illuminating, I'd tend to wait for Java 11 (only 6 months from now) So it seems we will need to replace Java EE by Eclipse Jakarta, not sure
when yet, I guess before moving to Java 11
TL;DR: EE: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk/11/
More at
https://dzone.com/articles
FYI: http://blog.joda.org/2018/02/java-9-has-six-weeks-to-live.html
Regards,
Michael
> Am 31.01.2018 um 17:44 schrieb Taher Alkhateeb :
>
> I suspect that there is no difference between openjdk and oracle jdk as far
> as the release cycle because oracle steers both.
>
> However, like Jacopo I
I suspect that there is no difference between openjdk and oracle jdk as far
as the release cycle because oracle steers both.
However, like Jacopo I am not too concerned. The quick release cycle they
want to adopt means that there will be perhaps less drastic changes between
the versions.
I am ope
Hi all,
Not sure if this is workable.
Can we do open-source development against OpenJDK using a version that is close
to an Oracle JDK with LTS? Customers can choose the corresponding Oracle JDK
with LTS in production if they want to.
Regards,
James Yong
On 2018/01/29 16:21:50, Michael Brohl
Hi Deepak,
depending on the model we choose, this could be a consequence, yes. This
was one of the reasons why I raised this topic.
I see the advantage that we'll have to be more focused on stability and
make good decisions what will go into a release. The downside is that
we'll have the rel
In this case what about our release polices?
Are we going to update release as well in every 6 month?
Thanks & Regards
--
Deepak Dixit
www.hotwaxsystems.com
www.hotwax.co
On Wed, Jan 31, 2018 at 12:52 AM, Jacques Le Roux <
jacques.le.r...@les7arts.com> wrote:
> This indeed lets not much choices
This indeed lets not much choices
Jacques
Le 30/01/2018 à 18:35, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
I see. Hmm, then I'm not sure, but perhaps we have no choice but to go
with the short term releases then.
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 8:32 PM, Michael Brohl wrote:
The problem with LTS is that it is not f
I see. Hmm, then I'm not sure, but perhaps we have no choice but to go
with the short term releases then.
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 8:32 PM, Michael Brohl wrote:
> The problem with LTS is that it is not free. If we stick to LTS, we won't
> support the users which use the public versions. To get sec
The problem with LTS is that it is not free. If we stick to LTS, we
won't support the users which use the public versions. To get security
updates, these users have to change their version every half year.
It's difficult to say if you will have compatibility problems beetween
those public vers
Sure but If we choose to go with 9, then we _must_ keep jumping every
6 months or so. You either stick with an LTS or you don't, and as per
my understanding 9 and 10 are not LTS. Read the article for more
information.
On Tue, Jan 30, 2018 at 8:01 PM, Jacques Le Roux
wrote:
> That sounds wise to m
That sounds wise to me, maybe we can try Java 9 though, to not get too much
things to do later?
Jacques
Le 30/01/2018 à 17:49, Taher Alkhateeb a écrit :
If I understood the documentation correctly, we have to choose between
two different packages:
- Stable release (long term support, less fea
If I understood the documentation correctly, we have to choose between
two different packages:
- Stable release (long term support, less features)
- Feature release (short term support, more features)
Of the two, I think the stable LTS seems to be more compatible with
our own release cycle. Also w
Hi,
I was wondering about that too when I read this thread on Tweeter
https://twitter.com/holgerbrands/status/957572736129339392
But it seems OK finally
Jacques
Le 30/01/2018 à 10:27, Jacopo Cappellato a écrit :
Thank you Michael for starting this thread.
When discussing this, we will also
Thank you Michael for starting this thread.
When discussing this, we will also have to consider that OFBiz currently
depends on several other Open Source products that will have to be
compatible with the platform we will choose (however, considering that
backward compatibility is maintained in new
Hi devs,
this is just an initial information and dicussion starter to make
everyone aware of this:
the Oracle Java release model is changing from a feature based to a time
based model [1]. One major drawback is that there will be no more public
patch releases for older versions once a new re
36 matches
Mail list logo
