You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@logging.apache.org by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com> on 2018/02/13 00:28:03 UTC
Java 7 as well as future JDK support strategy.
There is an article at InfoQ that discusses Oracle’s support strategy [1]. It contains a chart that shows the support lifetime for all Oracle releases. [2] It references a blog post from Azul discussing Oracle’s support strategy. [3] These charts are confirmed by Oracle’s roadmap. [4]. The end of public updates for Java 7 was in April 2015 and the end of premier support is July 2019. [5]
First, based on this and the decline in the interest in Java 7 and that we are now about 3 years past the last public updates I am fine with making Java 8 our minimum version along with the release of Log4j 3.0. FWIW, while SLF4J still supports Java 5, as of today Logback 1.3.0 now requires a minimum of Java 8.
After that things start to get strange. I think we will have to take advantage of the multi-release jar support more and more in the future because I don’t see how we could ever make Java 9 or 10 the minimum supported version since Oracle will effectively drop support for them 6 months after they are introduced. I would think we would have to wait until Java 8 usage declines to the levels Java 7 currently is before upgrading and at that time we would have to skip all the way to Java 11.
Whatever we decide to do I would prefer if we could publish our JVM support strategy on the web site.
Ralph
1. https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18 <https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18>
2. https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-1517328730133.jpg <https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-1517328730133.jpg>
3. https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/ <https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/>
4. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html <http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html>
5. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/eol-135779.html#java-commercial-offerings <http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/eol-135779.html#java-commercial-offerings>
Re: Java 7 as well as future JDK support strategy.
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
On 13 February 2018 at 18:50, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I seriously doubt that Oracle will turn down a pile of cash ...
>
Yeah, me neither.
> If we want to say that in the future, we plan on only supporting LTS
> releases, sure, we can say that now, but what's the point? We are so far
> from that it seems. We could say that that's what we'd like to do as
> something sensible and not leading to a trip to the loony bin. But it seems
> like future tripping since we are thinking on staying on Java 8 for a
> while.
>
Considering the number of times the question has been asked about when we
can upgrade to Java 8, having a general policy surrounding the support
cycle of Java itself makes a lot of sense. We could even use it with
breaking version number changes (e.g., 3.x is Java 8, 4.x is Java 11, 5.x
is Java 14, ...).
--
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Java 7 as well as future JDK support strategy.
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
Depending on how well we can support ongoing compatibility with multiple
versions, we may be able to support two LTS releases concurrently for some
time even. This also depends on how well applications support the new
multiversion jar feature.
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 22:57, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
wrote:
>
>
> > On Feb 13, 2018, at 9:26 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 6:22 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
> <ma...@dslextreme.com>>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Well, here are some things to think about.
> >> 1. When Oracle drops support for Java 9 next month does that mean we
> want
> >> to replace it with Java 10 in our toolchain?
> >> a. Infra still includes JDK 1.4 in its list of choices so I’m sure
> >> they will continue to allow Java 9 to be used.
> >> b. I see nothing in Java 10 that we would need to support or would
> >> impact Log4j users.
> >> c. I know you like to make sure we are always compatible with the
> >> latest everything, so I don’t know why this would be any different.
> >> 2. How will this impact our support strategy? If someone reports a
> problem
> >> with Java 9 in April are we going to tell them to try it with Java 10?
> We
> >> have always been a bit lax (as we are with Java 7) since we know that
> there
> >> are some companies that have purchased support. I can’t imagine these
> same
> >> (ultra conservative) companies upgrading to a non-LTS release so I
> really
> >> do doubt that anyone will be using Java 9 in production come June.
> >>
> >> If Oracle decides to provide support outside of what they have publicly
> >> stated of course they can do that, but I doubt you or I will ever know
> >> about it. I suspect most open source projects will take them at their
> word
> >> and more or less ignore non-LTS releases.
> >>
> >
> > This sounds like Oracle's way of trying to get more money from Java 6/7/8
> > and also declaring Java 9/10 DOA and Java 11 as the next release to use.
> > This is all awful. MR jars, Modules, and now this. What a stinking pile
> :-(
>
> And now you understand why I brought this up. I guess I am encouraging
> that we make an “editorial” comment on our web site by way of saying how
> much of a pita this is and how Log4j is going to deal with it. And we
> apologize in advance for how this may effect our users.
>
> Ralph
--
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Java 7 as well as future JDK support strategy.
Posted by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>.
> On Feb 13, 2018, at 9:26 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 6:22 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com <ma...@dslextreme.com>>
> wrote:
>
>> Well, here are some things to think about.
>> 1. When Oracle drops support for Java 9 next month does that mean we want
>> to replace it with Java 10 in our toolchain?
>> a. Infra still includes JDK 1.4 in its list of choices so I’m sure
>> they will continue to allow Java 9 to be used.
>> b. I see nothing in Java 10 that we would need to support or would
>> impact Log4j users.
>> c. I know you like to make sure we are always compatible with the
>> latest everything, so I don’t know why this would be any different.
>> 2. How will this impact our support strategy? If someone reports a problem
>> with Java 9 in April are we going to tell them to try it with Java 10? We
>> have always been a bit lax (as we are with Java 7) since we know that there
>> are some companies that have purchased support. I can’t imagine these same
>> (ultra conservative) companies upgrading to a non-LTS release so I really
>> do doubt that anyone will be using Java 9 in production come June.
>>
>> If Oracle decides to provide support outside of what they have publicly
>> stated of course they can do that, but I doubt you or I will ever know
>> about it. I suspect most open source projects will take them at their word
>> and more or less ignore non-LTS releases.
>>
>
> This sounds like Oracle's way of trying to get more money from Java 6/7/8
> and also declaring Java 9/10 DOA and Java 11 as the next release to use.
> This is all awful. MR jars, Modules, and now this. What a stinking pile :-(
And now you understand why I brought this up. I guess I am encouraging that we make an “editorial” comment on our web site by way of saying how much of a pita this is and how Log4j is going to deal with it. And we apologize in advance for how this may effect our users.
Ralph
Re: Java 7 as well as future JDK support strategy.
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
On 13 February 2018 at 22:26, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
> This sounds like Oracle's way of trying to get more money
This is literally the only thing they're designed to do. I don't need to
link to any of the Larry Ellison memes to get my point across here.
> from Java 6/7/8
> and also declaring Java 9/10 DOA and Java 11 as the next release to use.
> This is all awful. MR jars, Modules, and now this. What a stinking pile :-(
>
Those all stem from miscommunication, so we can only hope that's not the
case in the future. The version number itself is a consequence of the
discussion to create said naming scheme. There were other proposals that
didn't make it seem so confusing as a production user, but the simplest
schema won.
--
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Java 7 as well as future JDK support strategy.
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 6:22 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
wrote:
> Well, here are some things to think about.
> 1. When Oracle drops support for Java 9 next month does that mean we want
> to replace it with Java 10 in our toolchain?
> a. Infra still includes JDK 1.4 in its list of choices so I’m sure
> they will continue to allow Java 9 to be used.
> b. I see nothing in Java 10 that we would need to support or would
> impact Log4j users.
> c. I know you like to make sure we are always compatible with the
> latest everything, so I don’t know why this would be any different.
> 2. How will this impact our support strategy? If someone reports a problem
> with Java 9 in April are we going to tell them to try it with Java 10? We
> have always been a bit lax (as we are with Java 7) since we know that there
> are some companies that have purchased support. I can’t imagine these same
> (ultra conservative) companies upgrading to a non-LTS release so I really
> do doubt that anyone will be using Java 9 in production come June.
>
> If Oracle decides to provide support outside of what they have publicly
> stated of course they can do that, but I doubt you or I will ever know
> about it. I suspect most open source projects will take them at their word
> and more or less ignore non-LTS releases.
>
This sounds like Oracle's way of trying to get more money from Java 6/7/8
and also declaring Java 9/10 DOA and Java 11 as the next release to use.
This is all awful. MR jars, Modules, and now this. What a stinking pile :-(
Gary
>
> Ralph
>
> > On Feb 13, 2018, at 5:50 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 5:17 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Did you look at any of the links in my email? Java 10 will be released
> in
> >> March. When that happens Java 9 will be unsupported for everyone. You
> >> cannot purchase support for it or get security updates. It is dead.
> >
> >
> > I seriously doubt that Oracle will turn down a pile of cash when some
> > Fortune 500 company asks for maintenance on some random Java 7/8/9/10/11
> > version. For what's available for free OTOH, all bests are off indeed.
> >
> >
> >> The same thing will happen with Java 10 in September when Java 11 is
> >> released. So having a policy that we will only ever choose an LTS
> version
> >> as our minimum supported version makes sense to me. We can even predict
> >> when we will do that if we want.
> >>
> >
> > If we want to say that in the future, we plan on only supporting LTS
> > releases, sure, we can say that now, but what's the point? We are so far
> > from that it seems. We could say that that's what we'd like to do as
> > something sensible and not leading to a trip to the loony bin. But it
> seems
> > like future tripping since we are thinking on staying on Java 8 for a
> > while.
> >
> > Gary
> >
> >
> >> That isn’t to say we cannot support Java 10+ features. The multi-release
> >> jar was introduced to explicitly allow us to do that, although I agree
> it
> >> is unfortunate that it was done in a way that causes so much grief.
> >>
> >> Ralph
> >>
> >>> On Feb 13, 2018, at 5:10 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 5:04 PM, Ralph Goers <
> ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
> >>>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> While I agree with your statements regarding Java 7 and 8 I can’t
> think
> >> of
> >>>> why we would ever want to have Java 9 or 10 be the minimum supported
> >>>> version. Would you be comfortable saying that knowing that those
> >> versions
> >>>> aren’t supported by Oracle in any way for anyone?
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Pardon my brain fog but I am not sure what you mean by "Would you be
> >>> comfortable saying that knowing that those versions aren’t supported by
> >>> Oracle in any way for anyone?"
> >>>
> >>> WRT Java 9, I am very disappointed by the mess that Java multi-release
> >> jars
> >>> are causing in tool chains and Java modules feel like OSGi NIH. I would
> >> be
> >>> happy to sit on Java 8 for a while.
> >>>
> >>> Gary
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Ralph
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Feb 13, 2018, at 3:26 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 9:44 PM, Ralph Goers <
> >> ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
> >>>>>
> >>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> I found this update that says Oracle has extended the public support
> >> of
> >>>>>> Java 8 about 4 months past the release of Java 11.
> >>>>>> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/02/Java8SupportJan18 <
> >>>>>> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/02/Java8SupportJan18>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I do not think we need to create ourselves a set of handcuffs here. I
> >>>> could
> >>>>> see a "Roadmap" page that states that the next version will be 2.11.0
> >> and
> >>>>> that will be Java 7 and that we imagine 2.x staying on Java 7. Next
> >> will
> >>>> be
> >>>>> 3.0.0 which will be Java 8. Anything beyond that is speculation.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Gary
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Ralph
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Feb 12, 2018, at 5:28 PM, Ralph Goers <
> ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
> >>>
> >>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> There is an article at InfoQ that discusses Oracle’s support
> strategy
> >>>>>> [1]. It contains a chart that shows the support lifetime for all
> >> Oracle
> >>>>>> releases. [2] It references a blog post from Azul discussing
> Oracle’s
> >>>>>> support strategy. [3] These charts are confirmed by Oracle’s
> roadmap.
> >>>> [4].
> >>>>>> The end of public updates for Java 7 was in April 2015 and the end
> of
> >>>>>> premier support is July 2019. [5]
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> First, based on this and the decline in the interest in Java 7 and
> >> that
> >>>>>> we are now about 3 years past the last public updates I am fine with
> >>>> making
> >>>>>> Java 8 our minimum version along with the release of Log4j 3.0.
> FWIW,
> >>>> while
> >>>>>> SLF4J still supports Java 5, as of today Logback 1.3.0 now requires
> a
> >>>>>> minimum of Java 8.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> After that things start to get strange. I think we will have to
> take
> >>>>>> advantage of the multi-release jar support more and more in the
> future
> >>>>>> because I don’t see how we could ever make Java 9 or 10 the minimum
> >>>>>> supported version since Oracle will effectively drop support for
> them
> >> 6
> >>>>>> months after they are introduced. I would think we would have to
> wait
> >>>> until
> >>>>>> Java 8 usage declines to the levels Java 7 currently is before
> >> upgrading
> >>>>>> and at that time we would have to skip all the way to Java 11.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Whatever we decide to do I would prefer if we could publish our JVM
> >>>>>> support strategy on the web site.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Ralph
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 1. https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18 <
> >>>>>> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18>
> >>>>>>> 2. https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/
> >>>>>> resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-
> >> 1517328730133.jpg
> >>>> <
> >>>>>> https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/
> >>>>>> resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-
> >>>> 1517328730133.jpg>
> >>>>>>> 3. https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/
> <
> >>>>>> https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/>
> >>>>>>> 4. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html <
> >>>>>> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html>
> >>>>>>> 5. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/eol-
> >>>>>> 135779.html#java-commercial-offerings <http://www.oracle.com/
> >>>>>> technetwork/java/javase/eol-135779.html#java-commercial-offerings>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>
Re: Java 7 as well as future JDK support strategy.
Posted by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>.
Well, here are some things to think about.
1. When Oracle drops support for Java 9 next month does that mean we want to replace it with Java 10 in our toolchain?
a. Infra still includes JDK 1.4 in its list of choices so I’m sure they will continue to allow Java 9 to be used.
b. I see nothing in Java 10 that we would need to support or would impact Log4j users.
c. I know you like to make sure we are always compatible with the latest everything, so I don’t know why this would be any different.
2. How will this impact our support strategy? If someone reports a problem with Java 9 in April are we going to tell them to try it with Java 10? We have always been a bit lax (as we are with Java 7) since we know that there are some companies that have purchased support. I can’t imagine these same (ultra conservative) companies upgrading to a non-LTS release so I really do doubt that anyone will be using Java 9 in production come June.
If Oracle decides to provide support outside of what they have publicly stated of course they can do that, but I doubt you or I will ever know about it. I suspect most open source projects will take them at their word and more or less ignore non-LTS releases.
Ralph
> On Feb 13, 2018, at 5:50 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 5:17 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Did you look at any of the links in my email? Java 10 will be released in
>> March. When that happens Java 9 will be unsupported for everyone. You
>> cannot purchase support for it or get security updates. It is dead.
>
>
> I seriously doubt that Oracle will turn down a pile of cash when some
> Fortune 500 company asks for maintenance on some random Java 7/8/9/10/11
> version. For what's available for free OTOH, all bests are off indeed.
>
>
>> The same thing will happen with Java 10 in September when Java 11 is
>> released. So having a policy that we will only ever choose an LTS version
>> as our minimum supported version makes sense to me. We can even predict
>> when we will do that if we want.
>>
>
> If we want to say that in the future, we plan on only supporting LTS
> releases, sure, we can say that now, but what's the point? We are so far
> from that it seems. We could say that that's what we'd like to do as
> something sensible and not leading to a trip to the loony bin. But it seems
> like future tripping since we are thinking on staying on Java 8 for a
> while.
>
> Gary
>
>
>> That isn’t to say we cannot support Java 10+ features. The multi-release
>> jar was introduced to explicitly allow us to do that, although I agree it
>> is unfortunate that it was done in a way that causes so much grief.
>>
>> Ralph
>>
>>> On Feb 13, 2018, at 5:10 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 5:04 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> While I agree with your statements regarding Java 7 and 8 I can’t think
>> of
>>>> why we would ever want to have Java 9 or 10 be the minimum supported
>>>> version. Would you be comfortable saying that knowing that those
>> versions
>>>> aren’t supported by Oracle in any way for anyone?
>>>>
>>>
>>> Pardon my brain fog but I am not sure what you mean by "Would you be
>>> comfortable saying that knowing that those versions aren’t supported by
>>> Oracle in any way for anyone?"
>>>
>>> WRT Java 9, I am very disappointed by the mess that Java multi-release
>> jars
>>> are causing in tool chains and Java modules feel like OSGi NIH. I would
>> be
>>> happy to sit on Java 8 for a while.
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>>
>>>> Ralph
>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 13, 2018, at 3:26 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 9:44 PM, Ralph Goers <
>> ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
>>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I found this update that says Oracle has extended the public support
>> of
>>>>>> Java 8 about 4 months past the release of Java 11.
>>>>>> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/02/Java8SupportJan18 <
>>>>>> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/02/Java8SupportJan18>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I do not think we need to create ourselves a set of handcuffs here. I
>>>> could
>>>>> see a "Roadmap" page that states that the next version will be 2.11.0
>> and
>>>>> that will be Java 7 and that we imagine 2.x staying on Java 7. Next
>> will
>>>> be
>>>>> 3.0.0 which will be Java 8. Anything beyond that is speculation.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Feb 12, 2018, at 5:28 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
>>>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is an article at InfoQ that discusses Oracle’s support strategy
>>>>>> [1]. It contains a chart that shows the support lifetime for all
>> Oracle
>>>>>> releases. [2] It references a blog post from Azul discussing Oracle’s
>>>>>> support strategy. [3] These charts are confirmed by Oracle’s roadmap.
>>>> [4].
>>>>>> The end of public updates for Java 7 was in April 2015 and the end of
>>>>>> premier support is July 2019. [5]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> First, based on this and the decline in the interest in Java 7 and
>> that
>>>>>> we are now about 3 years past the last public updates I am fine with
>>>> making
>>>>>> Java 8 our minimum version along with the release of Log4j 3.0. FWIW,
>>>> while
>>>>>> SLF4J still supports Java 5, as of today Logback 1.3.0 now requires a
>>>>>> minimum of Java 8.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> After that things start to get strange. I think we will have to take
>>>>>> advantage of the multi-release jar support more and more in the future
>>>>>> because I don’t see how we could ever make Java 9 or 10 the minimum
>>>>>> supported version since Oracle will effectively drop support for them
>> 6
>>>>>> months after they are introduced. I would think we would have to wait
>>>> until
>>>>>> Java 8 usage declines to the levels Java 7 currently is before
>> upgrading
>>>>>> and at that time we would have to skip all the way to Java 11.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Whatever we decide to do I would prefer if we could publish our JVM
>>>>>> support strategy on the web site.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18 <
>>>>>> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18>
>>>>>>> 2. https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/
>>>>>> resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-
>> 1517328730133.jpg
>>>> <
>>>>>> https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/
>>>>>> resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-
>>>> 1517328730133.jpg>
>>>>>>> 3. https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/ <
>>>>>> https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/>
>>>>>>> 4. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html <
>>>>>> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html>
>>>>>>> 5. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/eol-
>>>>>> 135779.html#java-commercial-offerings <http://www.oracle.com/
>>>>>> technetwork/java/javase/eol-135779.html#java-commercial-offerings>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
Re: Java 7 as well as future JDK support strategy.
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 5:17 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
wrote:
> Did you look at any of the links in my email? Java 10 will be released in
> March. When that happens Java 9 will be unsupported for everyone. You
> cannot purchase support for it or get security updates. It is dead.
I seriously doubt that Oracle will turn down a pile of cash when some
Fortune 500 company asks for maintenance on some random Java 7/8/9/10/11
version. For what's available for free OTOH, all bests are off indeed.
> The same thing will happen with Java 10 in September when Java 11 is
> released. So having a policy that we will only ever choose an LTS version
> as our minimum supported version makes sense to me. We can even predict
> when we will do that if we want.
>
If we want to say that in the future, we plan on only supporting LTS
releases, sure, we can say that now, but what's the point? We are so far
from that it seems. We could say that that's what we'd like to do as
something sensible and not leading to a trip to the loony bin. But it seems
like future tripping since we are thinking on staying on Java 8 for a
while.
Gary
> That isn’t to say we cannot support Java 10+ features. The multi-release
> jar was introduced to explicitly allow us to do that, although I agree it
> is unfortunate that it was done in a way that causes so much grief.
>
> Ralph
>
> > On Feb 13, 2018, at 5:10 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 5:04 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> While I agree with your statements regarding Java 7 and 8 I can’t think
> of
> >> why we would ever want to have Java 9 or 10 be the minimum supported
> >> version. Would you be comfortable saying that knowing that those
> versions
> >> aren’t supported by Oracle in any way for anyone?
> >>
> >
> > Pardon my brain fog but I am not sure what you mean by "Would you be
> > comfortable saying that knowing that those versions aren’t supported by
> > Oracle in any way for anyone?"
> >
> > WRT Java 9, I am very disappointed by the mess that Java multi-release
> jars
> > are causing in tool chains and Java modules feel like OSGi NIH. I would
> be
> > happy to sit on Java 8 for a while.
> >
> > Gary
> >
> >
> >> Ralph
> >>
> >>> On Feb 13, 2018, at 3:26 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 9:44 PM, Ralph Goers <
> ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
> >>>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> I found this update that says Oracle has extended the public support
> of
> >>>> Java 8 about 4 months past the release of Java 11.
> >>>> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/02/Java8SupportJan18 <
> >>>> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/02/Java8SupportJan18>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I do not think we need to create ourselves a set of handcuffs here. I
> >> could
> >>> see a "Roadmap" page that states that the next version will be 2.11.0
> and
> >>> that will be Java 7 and that we imagine 2.x staying on Java 7. Next
> will
> >> be
> >>> 3.0.0 which will be Java 8. Anything beyond that is speculation.
> >>>
> >>> Gary
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Ralph
> >>>>
> >>>>> On Feb 12, 2018, at 5:28 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
> >
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> There is an article at InfoQ that discusses Oracle’s support strategy
> >>>> [1]. It contains a chart that shows the support lifetime for all
> Oracle
> >>>> releases. [2] It references a blog post from Azul discussing Oracle’s
> >>>> support strategy. [3] These charts are confirmed by Oracle’s roadmap.
> >> [4].
> >>>> The end of public updates for Java 7 was in April 2015 and the end of
> >>>> premier support is July 2019. [5]
> >>>>>
> >>>>> First, based on this and the decline in the interest in Java 7 and
> that
> >>>> we are now about 3 years past the last public updates I am fine with
> >> making
> >>>> Java 8 our minimum version along with the release of Log4j 3.0. FWIW,
> >> while
> >>>> SLF4J still supports Java 5, as of today Logback 1.3.0 now requires a
> >>>> minimum of Java 8.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> After that things start to get strange. I think we will have to take
> >>>> advantage of the multi-release jar support more and more in the future
> >>>> because I don’t see how we could ever make Java 9 or 10 the minimum
> >>>> supported version since Oracle will effectively drop support for them
> 6
> >>>> months after they are introduced. I would think we would have to wait
> >> until
> >>>> Java 8 usage declines to the levels Java 7 currently is before
> upgrading
> >>>> and at that time we would have to skip all the way to Java 11.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Whatever we decide to do I would prefer if we could publish our JVM
> >>>> support strategy on the web site.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Ralph
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 1. https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18 <
> >>>> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18>
> >>>>> 2. https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/
> >>>> resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-
> 1517328730133.jpg
> >> <
> >>>> https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/
> >>>> resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-
> >> 1517328730133.jpg>
> >>>>> 3. https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/ <
> >>>> https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/>
> >>>>> 4. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html <
> >>>> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html>
> >>>>> 5. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/eol-
> >>>> 135779.html#java-commercial-offerings <http://www.oracle.com/
> >>>> technetwork/java/javase/eol-135779.html#java-commercial-offerings>
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>
Re: Java 7 as well as future JDK support strategy.
Posted by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>.
Did you look at any of the links in my email? Java 10 will be released in March. When that happens Java 9 will be unsupported for everyone. You cannot purchase support for it or get security updates. It is dead. The same thing will happen with Java 10 in September when Java 11 is released. So having a policy that we will only ever choose an LTS version as our minimum supported version makes sense to me. We can even predict when we will do that if we want.
That isn’t to say we cannot support Java 10+ features. The multi-release jar was introduced to explicitly allow us to do that, although I agree it is unfortunate that it was done in a way that causes so much grief.
Ralph
> On Feb 13, 2018, at 5:10 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 5:04 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
> wrote:
>
>> While I agree with your statements regarding Java 7 and 8 I can’t think of
>> why we would ever want to have Java 9 or 10 be the minimum supported
>> version. Would you be comfortable saying that knowing that those versions
>> aren’t supported by Oracle in any way for anyone?
>>
>
> Pardon my brain fog but I am not sure what you mean by "Would you be
> comfortable saying that knowing that those versions aren’t supported by
> Oracle in any way for anyone?"
>
> WRT Java 9, I am very disappointed by the mess that Java multi-release jars
> are causing in tool chains and Java modules feel like OSGi NIH. I would be
> happy to sit on Java 8 for a while.
>
> Gary
>
>
>> Ralph
>>
>>> On Feb 13, 2018, at 3:26 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 9:44 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I found this update that says Oracle has extended the public support of
>>>> Java 8 about 4 months past the release of Java 11.
>>>> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/02/Java8SupportJan18 <
>>>> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/02/Java8SupportJan18>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I do not think we need to create ourselves a set of handcuffs here. I
>> could
>>> see a "Roadmap" page that states that the next version will be 2.11.0 and
>>> that will be Java 7 and that we imagine 2.x staying on Java 7. Next will
>> be
>>> 3.0.0 which will be Java 8. Anything beyond that is speculation.
>>>
>>> Gary
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Ralph
>>>>
>>>>> On Feb 12, 2018, at 5:28 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> There is an article at InfoQ that discusses Oracle’s support strategy
>>>> [1]. It contains a chart that shows the support lifetime for all Oracle
>>>> releases. [2] It references a blog post from Azul discussing Oracle’s
>>>> support strategy. [3] These charts are confirmed by Oracle’s roadmap.
>> [4].
>>>> The end of public updates for Java 7 was in April 2015 and the end of
>>>> premier support is July 2019. [5]
>>>>>
>>>>> First, based on this and the decline in the interest in Java 7 and that
>>>> we are now about 3 years past the last public updates I am fine with
>> making
>>>> Java 8 our minimum version along with the release of Log4j 3.0. FWIW,
>> while
>>>> SLF4J still supports Java 5, as of today Logback 1.3.0 now requires a
>>>> minimum of Java 8.
>>>>>
>>>>> After that things start to get strange. I think we will have to take
>>>> advantage of the multi-release jar support more and more in the future
>>>> because I don’t see how we could ever make Java 9 or 10 the minimum
>>>> supported version since Oracle will effectively drop support for them 6
>>>> months after they are introduced. I would think we would have to wait
>> until
>>>> Java 8 usage declines to the levels Java 7 currently is before upgrading
>>>> and at that time we would have to skip all the way to Java 11.
>>>>>
>>>>> Whatever we decide to do I would prefer if we could publish our JVM
>>>> support strategy on the web site.
>>>>>
>>>>> Ralph
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18 <
>>>> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18>
>>>>> 2. https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/
>>>> resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-1517328730133.jpg
>> <
>>>> https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/
>>>> resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-
>> 1517328730133.jpg>
>>>>> 3. https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/ <
>>>> https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/>
>>>>> 4. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html <
>>>> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html>
>>>>> 5. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/eol-
>>>> 135779.html#java-commercial-offerings <http://www.oracle.com/
>>>> technetwork/java/javase/eol-135779.html#java-commercial-offerings>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>>
Re: Java 7 as well as future JDK support strategy.
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 5:04 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
wrote:
> While I agree with your statements regarding Java 7 and 8 I can’t think of
> why we would ever want to have Java 9 or 10 be the minimum supported
> version. Would you be comfortable saying that knowing that those versions
> aren’t supported by Oracle in any way for anyone?
>
Pardon my brain fog but I am not sure what you mean by "Would you be
comfortable saying that knowing that those versions aren’t supported by
Oracle in any way for anyone?"
WRT Java 9, I am very disappointed by the mess that Java multi-release jars
are causing in tool chains and Java modules feel like OSGi NIH. I would be
happy to sit on Java 8 for a while.
Gary
> Ralph
>
> > On Feb 13, 2018, at 3:26 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 9:44 PM, Ralph Goers <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I found this update that says Oracle has extended the public support of
> >> Java 8 about 4 months past the release of Java 11.
> >> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/02/Java8SupportJan18 <
> >> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/02/Java8SupportJan18>
> >>
> >
> > I do not think we need to create ourselves a set of handcuffs here. I
> could
> > see a "Roadmap" page that states that the next version will be 2.11.0 and
> > that will be Java 7 and that we imagine 2.x staying on Java 7. Next will
> be
> > 3.0.0 which will be Java 8. Anything beyond that is speculation.
> >
> > Gary
> >
> >
> >
> >> Ralph
> >>
> >>> On Feb 12, 2018, at 5:28 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> There is an article at InfoQ that discusses Oracle’s support strategy
> >> [1]. It contains a chart that shows the support lifetime for all Oracle
> >> releases. [2] It references a blog post from Azul discussing Oracle’s
> >> support strategy. [3] These charts are confirmed by Oracle’s roadmap.
> [4].
> >> The end of public updates for Java 7 was in April 2015 and the end of
> >> premier support is July 2019. [5]
> >>>
> >>> First, based on this and the decline in the interest in Java 7 and that
> >> we are now about 3 years past the last public updates I am fine with
> making
> >> Java 8 our minimum version along with the release of Log4j 3.0. FWIW,
> while
> >> SLF4J still supports Java 5, as of today Logback 1.3.0 now requires a
> >> minimum of Java 8.
> >>>
> >>> After that things start to get strange. I think we will have to take
> >> advantage of the multi-release jar support more and more in the future
> >> because I don’t see how we could ever make Java 9 or 10 the minimum
> >> supported version since Oracle will effectively drop support for them 6
> >> months after they are introduced. I would think we would have to wait
> until
> >> Java 8 usage declines to the levels Java 7 currently is before upgrading
> >> and at that time we would have to skip all the way to Java 11.
> >>>
> >>> Whatever we decide to do I would prefer if we could publish our JVM
> >> support strategy on the web site.
> >>>
> >>> Ralph
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> 1. https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18 <
> >> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18>
> >>> 2. https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/
> >> resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-1517328730133.jpg
> <
> >> https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/
> >> resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-
> 1517328730133.jpg>
> >>> 3. https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/ <
> >> https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/>
> >>> 4. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html <
> >> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html>
> >>> 5. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/eol-
> >> 135779.html#java-commercial-offerings <http://www.oracle.com/
> >> technetwork/java/javase/eol-135779.html#java-commercial-offerings>
> >>
> >>
>
>
>
Re: Java 7 as well as future JDK support strategy.
Posted by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>.
While I agree with your statements regarding Java 7 and 8 I can’t think of why we would ever want to have Java 9 or 10 be the minimum supported version. Would you be comfortable saying that knowing that those versions aren’t supported by Oracle in any way for anyone?
Ralph
> On Feb 13, 2018, at 3:26 PM, Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 9:44 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I found this update that says Oracle has extended the public support of
>> Java 8 about 4 months past the release of Java 11.
>> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/02/Java8SupportJan18 <
>> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/02/Java8SupportJan18>
>>
>
> I do not think we need to create ourselves a set of handcuffs here. I could
> see a "Roadmap" page that states that the next version will be 2.11.0 and
> that will be Java 7 and that we imagine 2.x staying on Java 7. Next will be
> 3.0.0 which will be Java 8. Anything beyond that is speculation.
>
> Gary
>
>
>
>> Ralph
>>
>>> On Feb 12, 2018, at 5:28 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> There is an article at InfoQ that discusses Oracle’s support strategy
>> [1]. It contains a chart that shows the support lifetime for all Oracle
>> releases. [2] It references a blog post from Azul discussing Oracle’s
>> support strategy. [3] These charts are confirmed by Oracle’s roadmap. [4].
>> The end of public updates for Java 7 was in April 2015 and the end of
>> premier support is July 2019. [5]
>>>
>>> First, based on this and the decline in the interest in Java 7 and that
>> we are now about 3 years past the last public updates I am fine with making
>> Java 8 our minimum version along with the release of Log4j 3.0. FWIW, while
>> SLF4J still supports Java 5, as of today Logback 1.3.0 now requires a
>> minimum of Java 8.
>>>
>>> After that things start to get strange. I think we will have to take
>> advantage of the multi-release jar support more and more in the future
>> because I don’t see how we could ever make Java 9 or 10 the minimum
>> supported version since Oracle will effectively drop support for them 6
>> months after they are introduced. I would think we would have to wait until
>> Java 8 usage declines to the levels Java 7 currently is before upgrading
>> and at that time we would have to skip all the way to Java 11.
>>>
>>> Whatever we decide to do I would prefer if we could publish our JVM
>> support strategy on the web site.
>>>
>>> Ralph
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 1. https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18 <
>> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18>
>>> 2. https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/
>> resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-1517328730133.jpg <
>> https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/
>> resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-1517328730133.jpg>
>>> 3. https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/ <
>> https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/>
>>> 4. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html <
>> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html>
>>> 5. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/eol-
>> 135779.html#java-commercial-offerings <http://www.oracle.com/
>> technetwork/java/javase/eol-135779.html#java-commercial-offerings>
>>
>>
Re: Java 7 as well as future JDK support strategy.
Posted by Gary Gregory <ga...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 9:44 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
wrote:
> I found this update that says Oracle has extended the public support of
> Java 8 about 4 months past the release of Java 11.
> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/02/Java8SupportJan18 <
> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/02/Java8SupportJan18>
>
I do not think we need to create ourselves a set of handcuffs here. I could
see a "Roadmap" page that states that the next version will be 2.11.0 and
that will be Java 7 and that we imagine 2.x staying on Java 7. Next will be
3.0.0 which will be Java 8. Anything beyond that is speculation.
Gary
> Ralph
>
> > On Feb 12, 2018, at 5:28 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > There is an article at InfoQ that discusses Oracle’s support strategy
> [1]. It contains a chart that shows the support lifetime for all Oracle
> releases. [2] It references a blog post from Azul discussing Oracle’s
> support strategy. [3] These charts are confirmed by Oracle’s roadmap. [4].
> The end of public updates for Java 7 was in April 2015 and the end of
> premier support is July 2019. [5]
> >
> > First, based on this and the decline in the interest in Java 7 and that
> we are now about 3 years past the last public updates I am fine with making
> Java 8 our minimum version along with the release of Log4j 3.0. FWIW, while
> SLF4J still supports Java 5, as of today Logback 1.3.0 now requires a
> minimum of Java 8.
> >
> > After that things start to get strange. I think we will have to take
> advantage of the multi-release jar support more and more in the future
> because I don’t see how we could ever make Java 9 or 10 the minimum
> supported version since Oracle will effectively drop support for them 6
> months after they are introduced. I would think we would have to wait until
> Java 8 usage declines to the levels Java 7 currently is before upgrading
> and at that time we would have to skip all the way to Java 11.
> >
> > Whatever we decide to do I would prefer if we could publish our JVM
> support strategy on the web site.
> >
> > Ralph
> >
> >
> >
> > 1. https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18 <
> https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18>
> > 2. https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/
> resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-1517328730133.jpg <
> https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/
> resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-1517328730133.jpg>
> > 3. https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/ <
> https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/>
> > 4. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html <
> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html>
> > 5. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/eol-
> 135779.html#java-commercial-offerings <http://www.oracle.com/
> technetwork/java/javase/eol-135779.html#java-commercial-offerings>
>
>
Re: Java 7 as well as future JDK support strategy.
Posted by Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com>.
I found this update that says Oracle has extended the public support of Java 8 about 4 months past the release of Java 11. https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/02/Java8SupportJan18 <https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/02/Java8SupportJan18>
Ralph
> On Feb 12, 2018, at 5:28 PM, Ralph Goers <ra...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>
> There is an article at InfoQ that discusses Oracle’s support strategy [1]. It contains a chart that shows the support lifetime for all Oracle releases. [2] It references a blog post from Azul discussing Oracle’s support strategy. [3] These charts are confirmed by Oracle’s roadmap. [4]. The end of public updates for Java 7 was in April 2015 and the end of premier support is July 2019. [5]
>
> First, based on this and the decline in the interest in Java 7 and that we are now about 3 years past the last public updates I am fine with making Java 8 our minimum version along with the release of Log4j 3.0. FWIW, while SLF4J still supports Java 5, as of today Logback 1.3.0 now requires a minimum of Java 8.
>
> After that things start to get strange. I think we will have to take advantage of the multi-release jar support more and more in the future because I don’t see how we could ever make Java 9 or 10 the minimum supported version since Oracle will effectively drop support for them 6 months after they are introduced. I would think we would have to wait until Java 8 usage declines to the levels Java 7 currently is before upgrading and at that time we would have to skip all the way to Java 11.
>
> Whatever we decide to do I would prefer if we could publish our JVM support strategy on the web site.
>
> Ralph
>
>
>
> 1. https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18 <https://www.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18>
> 2. https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-1517328730133.jpg <https://res.infoq.com/news/2018/01/JavaSupportJan18/en/resources/1java-se-lifecycle-5-year-timeline-1024x683-1517328730133.jpg>
> 3. https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/ <https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/>
> 4. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html <http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/eol-135779.html>
> 5. http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/eol-135779.html#java-commercial-offerings <http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/eol-135779.html#java-commercial-offerings>