You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@karaf.apache.org by Robert Varga <ni...@hq.sk> on 2023/09/24 19:45:10 UTC

jre.properties vs. JEP220?

Hello everyone,

with karaf-4.5.0 requiring Java 11 
(https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-7754), there are a number 
of places where we can safely forget about how JVM < 9 did things, which 
could lead to simplifications.

One of these is Karaf's jre.properties, which (as I understand it) 
define the set of packages which are to be advertised by the OSGi 
framework (bundle 0, or somesuch, sorry, I am quite rusty on the spec).

JEP 220 (https://openjdk.org/jeps/220), integrated in Java 9, exposes 
the set of runtime-available packages as jrt:/packages/ (see 
https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8066492).

This would mean we can figure out the set of packages at runtime, would 
make jre.properties (and our adding a new jre-XY entry every 6 months), 
superfluous.

There is one wrinkle, which is javax.transaction.xa, but, with my all of 
no knowledge of J2EE, I think this a problem we need to deal with only 
until we transition to the jakarta namespaces (karaf-5?)[0]

Does this effort sound reasonable, or am I missing something?

Thanks,
Robert

[0] I think it might make sense to list Karaf, and perhaps Pax Web, 
somewhere searchable, like 
https://jakarta.ee/blogs/javax-jakartaee-namespace-ecosystem-progress/ .

Re: jre.properties vs. JEP220?

Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
It sounds good. Thanks !

Regards
JB

On Wed, Sep 27, 2023 at 6:35 PM Robert Varga <ni...@hq.sk> wrote:
>
> On 27/09/2023 08.30, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > It makes sense to me (it’s something that I wanted to explore).
> > So definitely worth to investigate.
>
> Cool. I think we can tuck this under
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-7765, if you are okay with that.
>
> Regards,
> Robert
>
> >
> > Regards
> > JB
> >
> > Le dim. 24 sept. 2023 à 21:45, Robert Varga <ni...@hq.sk> a écrit :
> >
> >> Hello everyone,
> >>
> >> with karaf-4.5.0 requiring Java 11
> >> (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-7754), there are a number
> >> of places where we can safely forget about how JVM < 9 did things, which
> >> could lead to simplifications.
> >>
> >> One of these is Karaf's jre.properties, which (as I understand it)
> >> define the set of packages which are to be advertised by the OSGi
> >> framework (bundle 0, or somesuch, sorry, I am quite rusty on the spec).
> >>
> >> JEP 220 (https://openjdk.org/jeps/220), integrated in Java 9, exposes
> >> the set of runtime-available packages as jrt:/packages/ (see
> >> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8066492).
> >>
> >> This would mean we can figure out the set of packages at runtime, would
> >> make jre.properties (and our adding a new jre-XY entry every 6 months),
> >> superfluous.
> >>
> >> There is one wrinkle, which is javax.transaction.xa, but, with my all of
> >> no knowledge of J2EE, I think this a problem we need to deal with only
> >> until we transition to the jakarta namespaces (karaf-5?)[0]
> >>
> >> Does this effort sound reasonable, or am I missing something?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Robert
> >>
> >> [0] I think it might make sense to list Karaf, and perhaps Pax Web,
> >> somewhere searchable, like
> >> https://jakarta.ee/blogs/javax-jakartaee-namespace-ecosystem-progress/ .
> >>
> >

Re: jre.properties vs. JEP220?

Posted by Robert Varga <ni...@hq.sk>.
On 27/09/2023 08.30, Jean-Baptiste Onofré wrote:
> Hi
> 
> It makes sense to me (it’s something that I wanted to explore).
> So definitely worth to investigate.

Cool. I think we can tuck this under 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-7765, if you are okay with that.

Regards,
Robert

> 
> Regards
> JB
> 
> Le dim. 24 sept. 2023 à 21:45, Robert Varga <ni...@hq.sk> a écrit :
> 
>> Hello everyone,
>>
>> with karaf-4.5.0 requiring Java 11
>> (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-7754), there are a number
>> of places where we can safely forget about how JVM < 9 did things, which
>> could lead to simplifications.
>>
>> One of these is Karaf's jre.properties, which (as I understand it)
>> define the set of packages which are to be advertised by the OSGi
>> framework (bundle 0, or somesuch, sorry, I am quite rusty on the spec).
>>
>> JEP 220 (https://openjdk.org/jeps/220), integrated in Java 9, exposes
>> the set of runtime-available packages as jrt:/packages/ (see
>> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8066492).
>>
>> This would mean we can figure out the set of packages at runtime, would
>> make jre.properties (and our adding a new jre-XY entry every 6 months),
>> superfluous.
>>
>> There is one wrinkle, which is javax.transaction.xa, but, with my all of
>> no knowledge of J2EE, I think this a problem we need to deal with only
>> until we transition to the jakarta namespaces (karaf-5?)[0]
>>
>> Does this effort sound reasonable, or am I missing something?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Robert
>>
>> [0] I think it might make sense to list Karaf, and perhaps Pax Web,
>> somewhere searchable, like
>> https://jakarta.ee/blogs/javax-jakartaee-namespace-ecosystem-progress/ .
>>
>

Re: jre.properties vs. JEP220?

Posted by Jean-Baptiste Onofré <jb...@nanthrax.net>.
Hi

It makes sense to me (it’s something that I wanted to explore).
So definitely worth to investigate.

Regards
JB

Le dim. 24 sept. 2023 à 21:45, Robert Varga <ni...@hq.sk> a écrit :

> Hello everyone,
>
> with karaf-4.5.0 requiring Java 11
> (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KARAF-7754), there are a number
> of places where we can safely forget about how JVM < 9 did things, which
> could lead to simplifications.
>
> One of these is Karaf's jre.properties, which (as I understand it)
> define the set of packages which are to be advertised by the OSGi
> framework (bundle 0, or somesuch, sorry, I am quite rusty on the spec).
>
> JEP 220 (https://openjdk.org/jeps/220), integrated in Java 9, exposes
> the set of runtime-available packages as jrt:/packages/ (see
> https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8066492).
>
> This would mean we can figure out the set of packages at runtime, would
> make jre.properties (and our adding a new jre-XY entry every 6 months),
> superfluous.
>
> There is one wrinkle, which is javax.transaction.xa, but, with my all of
> no knowledge of J2EE, I think this a problem we need to deal with only
> until we transition to the jakarta namespaces (karaf-5?)[0]
>
> Does this effort sound reasonable, or am I missing something?
>
> Thanks,
> Robert
>
> [0] I think it might make sense to list Karaf, and perhaps Pax Web,
> somewhere searchable, like
> https://jakarta.ee/blogs/javax-jakartaee-namespace-ecosystem-progress/ .
>