Re: Ready for JDK 9 ?

[Stephen Colebourne]

I didn't get the chance to reply when this thread happened, but really
a project should only be viewed as JDK 9 ready when it has had a
release with the Automatic-Module-Name entry in the manifest file.
AFAIK, only common-lang has this (Although commons-csv, email and jcs
were released recently I don't believe they have the entry).

Stephen



On 8 August 2017 at 21:48, Pascal Schumacher <pascalschumac...@gmx.net> wrote:
> Hello everybody,
>
> commons-lang and commons-text are build and tested with JDK 9 on traivs-ci,
> e.g.:
>
> https://travis-ci.org/apache/commons-text/jobs/259838032
> https://travis-ci.org/apache/commons-lang/jobs/258653445
>
> so I guess these components are ready for JDK 9.
>
> Cheers,
> Pascal
>
> Am 08.08.2017 um 12:09 schrieb Rory O'Donnell:
>>
>>
>> Hi Benedikt,
>>
>> Thank you very much for all your testing of JDK 9 during its development!
>> Such contributions have significantly helped shape and improve JDK 9.
>>
>> Now that we have reached the JDK 9 Final Release Candidate phase [1] , I
>> would like to ask if your project can be considered to be 'ready for JDK 9',
>> or if there are any remaining show stopper issues which you've encountered
>> when testing with the JDK 9 release candidate.
>>
>> JDK 9  b181 is available at http://jdk.java.net/9/
>>
>> If you have a public web page, mailing list post, or even a tweet
>> announcing you project's readiness for JDK 9, I'd love to add the URL to the
>> upcoming JDK 9 readiness page on the Quality Outreach wiki.
>>
>>
>> Looking forward to hearing from you,
>> Rory
>>
>> [1] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk9/
>>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: Ready for JDK 9 ?

[Gary Gregory]

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 1:00 PM, Ralph Goers 
wrote:

> I have my doubts about the module system but I am not sure why you would
> think multi-release jars will cause problems.
>

IIRC, multi-release jars causes problem in the Android tool chain. I
imagine there are going to be a lot of catching up to do from a lot of
vendors, tools and libraries. What a mess.

Gary


> Ralph
>
> > On Aug 9, 2017, at 8:28 AM, Gary Gregory  wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 1:09 AM, Jörg Schaible <
> > joerg.schai...@bpm-inspire.com >
> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Simon,
> >>
> >> Simon Spero wrote:
> >>
> >>> Compress HEAD is tested against the equivalent of RC. The main issues
> >> were
> >>> with tests; some types of mocking (especially of concrete classes)
> don't
> >>> work. This might have been fixed by now.
> >>> I believe that the latest jacoco is 9 compatible.
> >>>
> >>> [The biggest problem was caused by a bug in the zip code handling a
> >>> particular kind of timestamp; massive changes to the jdk implementation
> >> of
> >>> zip caused tests that had been passing (but shouldn't have) to fail
> >>> properly.]
> >>>
> >>> NOTE:
> >>>
> >>> Adding a Module name manifest header asserts that the code is tested
> >>> against Java 9. This is documented in the minutes of the armistice
> talks.
> >>>
> >>> jigsaw modules are pretty useless for most of Commons (consumers pretty
> >>> much have to shade dependencies). [ subliminal whisper about benefits
> of
> >>> having correct OSGI headers]
> >>
> >> OK, that means we should at least test those releases that contain a
> Module
> >> name now and silently assume, that the other stuff is not necessarily
> >> compatible. Do we have an overview, which components were released with
> >> such
> >> a name?
> >>
> >> Cheers,
> >> Jörg
> >>
> >> BWT: I am also not convinced by the benefits of Java 9 looking at the
> >> module
> >> system or the multi-version jars. I fear they will rather harm the Java
> >> ecosystem.
> >>
> >
> > Very sad indeed. These are all "features" that break applications left
> and
> > right.
> >
> > Gary
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> -
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org  dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org>
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org  dev-h...@commons.apache.org>
>

Re: Ready for JDK 9 ?

[Ralph Goers]

I have my doubts about the module system but I am not sure why you would think 
multi-release jars will cause problems.

Ralph

> On Aug 9, 2017, at 8:28 AM, Gary Gregory  wrote:
> 
> On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 1:09 AM, Jörg Schaible <
> joerg.schai...@bpm-inspire.com > wrote:
> 
>> Hi Simon,
>> 
>> Simon Spero wrote:
>> 
>>> Compress HEAD is tested against the equivalent of RC. The main issues
>> were
>>> with tests; some types of mocking (especially of concrete classes) don't
>>> work. This might have been fixed by now.
>>> I believe that the latest jacoco is 9 compatible.
>>> 
>>> [The biggest problem was caused by a bug in the zip code handling a
>>> particular kind of timestamp; massive changes to the jdk implementation
>> of
>>> zip caused tests that had been passing (but shouldn't have) to fail
>>> properly.]
>>> 
>>> NOTE:
>>> 
>>> Adding a Module name manifest header asserts that the code is tested
>>> against Java 9. This is documented in the minutes of the armistice talks.
>>> 
>>> jigsaw modules are pretty useless for most of Commons (consumers pretty
>>> much have to shade dependencies). [ subliminal whisper about benefits of
>>> having correct OSGI headers]
>> 
>> OK, that means we should at least test those releases that contain a Module
>> name now and silently assume, that the other stuff is not necessarily
>> compatible. Do we have an overview, which components were released with
>> such
>> a name?
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> Jörg
>> 
>> BWT: I am also not convinced by the benefits of Java 9 looking at the
>> module
>> system or the multi-version jars. I fear they will rather harm the Java
>> ecosystem.
>> 
> 
> Very sad indeed. These are all "features" that break applications left and
> right.
> 
> Gary
> 
> 
>> 
>> 
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org 
>> 
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org 
>> 

Re: Ready for JDK 9 ?

[Amey Jadiye]

Hi Jorg,

Yes,  I think rather just checking latest released source we should check
the HEAD of components to ensure we will not break next planned release
with java 9, at least we can fix if there is some issue from java9 RC it
self, that will ensure future stability.

Looking at commons-text latest build via Travis its still using EA,  Java
HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 9+175, mixed mode)., RC is build 9+181.

I have raised requested Travis-ci to update it [1] , lets see.

[1] https://github.com/travis-ci/travis-ci/issues/8233

Regards,
Amey


On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 1:33 PM, Jörg Schaible <
joerg.schai...@bpm-inspire.com> wrote:

> Hi Amey,
>
> Amey Jadiye wrote:
>
> > Hmm, isn't that easy with just Travis ? We just have to add java9
> > option(not sure it have RC) and trigger build it will automatically check
> > build and tests. IIRC for few components we are having java9 Travis env
> > already set.
>
> That would only ensure that the head revision runs with the Java 9 version,
> that is supplied by Travis ... is that already the RC?
>
> Cheers,
> Jörg
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>


-- 

-

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org

For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: Ready for JDK 9 ?

[Gary Gregory]

On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 1:09 AM, Jörg Schaible <
joerg.schai...@bpm-inspire.com> wrote:

> Hi Simon,
>
> Simon Spero wrote:
>
> > Compress HEAD is tested against the equivalent of RC. The main issues
> were
> > with tests; some types of mocking (especially of concrete classes) don't
> > work. This might have been fixed by now.
> > I believe that the latest jacoco is 9 compatible.
> >
> > [The biggest problem was caused by a bug in the zip code handling a
> > particular kind of timestamp; massive changes to the jdk implementation
> of
> > zip caused tests that had been passing (but shouldn't have) to fail
> > properly.]
> >
> > NOTE:
> >
> > Adding a Module name manifest header asserts that the code is tested
> > against Java 9. This is documented in the minutes of the armistice talks.
> >
> > jigsaw modules are pretty useless for most of Commons (consumers pretty
> > much have to shade dependencies). [ subliminal whisper about benefits of
> > having correct OSGI headers]
>
> OK, that means we should at least test those releases that contain a Module
> name now and silently assume, that the other stuff is not necessarily
> compatible. Do we have an overview, which components were released with
> such
> a name?
>
> Cheers,
> Jörg
>
> BWT: I am also not convinced by the benefits of Java 9 looking at the
> module
> system or the multi-version jars. I fear they will rather harm the Java
> ecosystem.
>

Very sad indeed. These are all "features" that break applications left and
right.

Gary


>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>

Re: Ready for JDK 9 ?

[Jörg Schaible]

Hi Simon,

Simon Spero wrote:

> Compress HEAD is tested against the equivalent of RC. The main issues were
> with tests; some types of mocking (especially of concrete classes) don't
> work. This might have been fixed by now.
> I believe that the latest jacoco is 9 compatible.
> 
> [The biggest problem was caused by a bug in the zip code handling a
> particular kind of timestamp; massive changes to the jdk implementation of
> zip caused tests that had been passing (but shouldn't have) to fail
> properly.]
> 
> NOTE:
> 
> Adding a Module name manifest header asserts that the code is tested
> against Java 9. This is documented in the minutes of the armistice talks.
> 
> jigsaw modules are pretty useless for most of Commons (consumers pretty
> much have to shade dependencies). [ subliminal whisper about benefits of
> having correct OSGI headers]

OK, that means we should at least test those releases that contain a Module 
name now and silently assume, that the other stuff is not necessarily 
compatible. Do we have an overview, which components were released with such 
a name?

Cheers,
Jörg

BWT: I am also not convinced by the benefits of Java 9 looking at the module 
system or the multi-version jars. I fear they will rather harm the Java 
ecosystem.



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: Ready for JDK 9 ?

[Jörg Schaible]

Hi Amey,

Amey Jadiye wrote:

> Hmm, isn't that easy with just Travis ? We just have to add java9
> option(not sure it have RC) and trigger build it will automatically check
> build and tests. IIRC for few components we are having java9 Travis env
> already set.

That would only ensure that the head revision runs with the Java 9 version, 
that is supplied by Travis ... is that already the RC?

Cheers,
Jörg


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: Ready for JDK 9 ?

[Pascal Schumacher]

The same goes for commons-compress (as already mentioned by Simon Spero):

https://travis-ci.org/apache/commons-compress/jobs/258642081

Am 08.08.2017 um 22:48 schrieb Pascal Schumacher:

Hello everybody,

commons-lang and commons-text are build and tested with JDK 9 on 
traivs-ci, e.g.:


https://travis-ci.org/apache/commons-text/jobs/259838032
https://travis-ci.org/apache/commons-lang/jobs/258653445

so I guess these components are ready for JDK 9.

Cheers,
Pascal

Am 08.08.2017 um 12:09 schrieb Rory O'Donnell:


Hi Benedikt,

Thank you very much for all your testing of JDK 9 during its 
development! Such contributions have significantly helped shape and 
improve JDK 9.


Now that we have reached the JDK 9 Final Release Candidate phase [1] 
, I would like to ask if your project can be considered to be 'ready 
for JDK 9', or if there are any remaining show stopper issues which 
you've encountered when testing with the JDK 9 release candidate.


JDK 9  b181 is available at http://jdk.java.net/9/

If you have a public web page, mailing list post, or even a tweet 
announcing you project's readiness for JDK 9, I'd love to add the URL 
to the upcoming JDK 9 readiness page on the Quality Outreach wiki.



Looking forward to hearing from you,
Rory

[1] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk9/




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: Ready for JDK 9 ?

[Pascal Schumacher]

Hello everybody,

commons-lang and commons-text are build and tested with JDK 9 on 
traivs-ci, e.g.:


https://travis-ci.org/apache/commons-text/jobs/259838032
https://travis-ci.org/apache/commons-lang/jobs/258653445

so I guess these components are ready for JDK 9.

Cheers,
Pascal

Am 08.08.2017 um 12:09 schrieb Rory O'Donnell:


Hi Benedikt,

Thank you very much for all your testing of JDK 9 during its 
development! Such contributions have significantly helped shape and 
improve JDK 9.


Now that we have reached the JDK 9 Final Release Candidate phase [1] , 
I would like to ask if your project can be considered to be 'ready for 
JDK 9', or if there are any remaining show stopper issues which you've 
encountered when testing with the JDK 9 release candidate.


JDK 9  b181 is available at http://jdk.java.net/9/

If you have a public web page, mailing list post, or even a tweet 
announcing you project's readiness for JDK 9, I'd love to add the URL 
to the upcoming JDK 9 readiness page on the Quality Outreach wiki.



Looking forward to hearing from you,
Rory

[1] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk9/




-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: Ready for JDK 9 ?

[Amey Jadiye]

Hmm, isn't that easy with just Travis ? We just have to add java9
option(not sure it have RC) and trigger build it will automatically check
build and tests. IIRC for few components we are having java9 Travis env
already set.

Regards,
Amey

On Tue, Aug 8, 2017, 8:38 PM Jörg Schaible <joerg.schai...@bpm-inspire.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Gilles wrote:
>
> > Hi.
> >
> > On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 11:09:01 +0100, Rory O'Donnell wrote:
> >> Hi Benedikt,
> >>
> >> Thank you very much for all your testing of JDK 9 during its
> >> development! Such contributions have significantly helped shape and
> >> improve JDK 9.
> >>
> >> Now that we have reached the JDK 9 Final Release Candidate phase [1]
> >> , I would like to ask if your project can be considered to be 'ready
> >> for JDK 9',
> >
> > Is there some simple thing to do in order to be able to answer
> > that question?
>
> IMHO no. Definitelly not in general for all components. Practically we
> would
> have to checkout the latest releases from source (or use the source
> tarballs) and run at least the unit tests with this Java 9 RC.
>
> Cheers,
> Jörg
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>

Re: Ready for JDK 9 ?

[Simon Spero]

Compress HEAD is tested against the equivalent of RC. The main issues were
with tests; some types of mocking (especially of concrete classes) don't
work. This might have been fixed by now.
I believe that the latest jacoco is 9 compatible.

[The biggest problem was caused by a bug in the zip code handling a
particular kind of timestamp; massive changes to the jdk implementation of
zip caused tests that had been passing (but shouldn't have) to fail
properly.]

NOTE:

Adding a Module name manifest header asserts that the code is tested
against Java 9. This is documented in the minutes of the armistice talks.

jigsaw modules are pretty useless for most of Commons (consumers pretty
much have to shade dependencies). [ subliminal whisper about benefits of
having correct OSGI headers]

Simon

On Aug 8, 2017 11:08 AM, "Jörg Schaible" <joerg.schai...@bpm-inspire.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Gilles wrote:
>
> > Hi.
> >
> > On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 11:09:01 +0100, Rory O'Donnell wrote:
> >> Hi Benedikt,
> >>
> >> Thank you very much for all your testing of JDK 9 during its
> >> development! Such contributions have significantly helped shape and
> >> improve JDK 9.
> >>
> >> Now that we have reached the JDK 9 Final Release Candidate phase [1]
> >> , I would like to ask if your project can be considered to be 'ready
> >> for JDK 9',
> >
> > Is there some simple thing to do in order to be able to answer
> > that question?
>
> IMHO no. Definitelly not in general for all components. Practically we
> would
> have to checkout the latest releases from source (or use the source
> tarballs) and run at least the unit tests with this Java 9 RC.
>
> Cheers,
> Jörg
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
>
>

Re: Ready for JDK 9 ?

[Bernd Eckenfels]

Hello,

I am willing to do that for a few components. Maybe we can collect the Java9 
state for commons on a Wiki Page, like:

Component | Compiles with 9 since | Module aware? | Latest bin Release runs in 
9. | Comments

(Not sure how easy the modules check will be and what we define as module 
aware. But the compile checks should be easy to do.)

Gruss
Bernd

Gruss
Bernd
--
http://bernd.eckenfels.net

From: Jörg Schaible <joerg.schai...@bpm-inspire.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2017 5:07:54 PM
To: dev@commons.apache.org
Subject: Re: Ready for JDK 9 ?

Hi,

Gilles wrote:

> Hi.
>
> On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 11:09:01 +0100, Rory O'Donnell wrote:
>> Hi Benedikt,
>>
>> Thank you very much for all your testing of JDK 9 during its
>> development! Such contributions have significantly helped shape and
>> improve JDK 9.
>>
>> Now that we have reached the JDK 9 Final Release Candidate phase [1]
>> , I would like to ask if your project can be considered to be 'ready
>> for JDK 9',
>
> Is there some simple thing to do in order to be able to answer
> that question?

IMHO no. Definitelly not in general for all components. Practically we would
have to checkout the latest releases from source (or use the source
tarballs) and run at least the unit tests with this Java 9 RC.

Cheers,
Jörg



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: Ready for JDK 9 ?

[Jörg Schaible]

Hi,

Gilles wrote:

> Hi.
> 
> On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 11:09:01 +0100, Rory O'Donnell wrote:
>> Hi Benedikt,
>>
>> Thank you very much for all your testing of JDK 9 during its
>> development! Such contributions have significantly helped shape and
>> improve JDK 9.
>>
>> Now that we have reached the JDK 9 Final Release Candidate phase [1]
>> , I would like to ask if your project can be considered to be 'ready
>> for JDK 9',
> 
> Is there some simple thing to do in order to be able to answer
> that question?

IMHO no. Definitelly not in general for all components. Practically we would 
have to checkout the latest releases from source (or use the source 
tarballs) and run at least the unit tests with this Java 9 RC.

Cheers,
Jörg



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Re: Ready for JDK 9 ?

[Gilles]

Hi.

On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 11:09:01 +0100, Rory O'Donnell wrote:

Hi Benedikt,

Thank you very much for all your testing of JDK 9 during its
development! Such contributions have significantly helped shape and
improve JDK 9.

Now that we have reached the JDK 9 Final Release Candidate phase [1]
, I would like to ask if your project can be considered to be 'ready
for JDK 9',


Is there some simple thing to do in order to be able to answer
that question?

Regards,
Gilles


or if there are any remaining show stopper issues which
you've encountered when testing with the JDK 9 release candidate.

JDK 9  b181 is available at http://jdk.java.net/9/

If you have a public web page, mailing list post, or even a tweet
announcing you project's readiness for JDK 9, I'd love to add the URL
to the upcoming JDK 9 readiness page on the Quality Outreach wiki.


Looking forward to hearing from you,
Rory

[1] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk9/



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org

Ready for JDK 9 ?

[Rory O'Donnell]

Hi Benedikt,

Thank you very much for all your testing of JDK 9 during its 
development! Such contributions have significantly helped shape and 
improve JDK 9.


Now that we have reached the JDK 9 Final Release Candidate phase [1] , I 
would like to ask if your project can be considered to be 'ready for JDK 
9', or if there are any remaining show stopper issues which you've 
encountered when testing with the JDK 9 release candidate.


JDK 9  b181 is available at http://jdk.java.net/9/

If you have a public web page, mailing list post, or even a tweet 
announcing you project's readiness for JDK 9, I'd love to add the URL to 
the upcoming JDK 9 readiness page on the Quality Outreach wiki.



Looking forward to hearing from you,
Rory

[1] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk9/

--
Rgds,Rory O'Donnell
Quality Engineering Manager
Oracle EMEA , Dublin, Ireland


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org