You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ofbiz.apache.org by Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de> on 2018/07/28 07:56:08 UTC
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the
project
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 "early access - update - test - go live"
circle for free Java versions.
Java 11 EA is available [2] so we could start to test with it.
The latest Intellij Idea already has support for Java 11, I suppose that
it will come for Eclipse Photon shortly also.
I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or Java 11.
We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to do it.
Another way would be to make a new branch which will support Java 11.
What do people think?
Best regards,
Michael Brohl
ecomify GmbH
www.ecomify.de
[1]
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javaseproducts/overview/javasesubscriptionfaq-4891443.html
[2] http://jdk.java.net/11/
Michael Brohl
Geschäftsführer
Fon +49 521 448 157-91
Fax +49 521 448 157-99
Mobil +49 160 3664918
Xing xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl
LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl
Company and Management Headquarters:
ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland
Fon: +49 521 448157-90, Fax: +49 521 448157-99, www.ecomify.de
Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683
Chief Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl
Am 29.01.18 um 17:21 schrieb Michael Brohl:
> 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 release is
> published, if I understand correctly.
>
> We'll have to discuss if this affects the project in terms of support
> for the latest public Java releases. If we want to stay up-to-date
> according to the public releases, we'll have to establish a process to
> early check the new features and changes of a coming release and maybe
> release more often.
>
> We might even have to support the latest Java release along with the
> current LTS release to cover both users with and without commercial
> support? I'm not sure.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Michael
>
> [1] https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/
>
>
>
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the
project
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
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 don't need to switch yet to Java 11 (it works also with Java 8), but we think that it's time to move on not only to Java 11
but also to Adoptopenjdk
What do you think?
Thanks
Jacques
Le 17/02/2019 à 13:28, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
> +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 <mi...@ecomify.de>
>> 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 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 OFBiz
>>> for the use of Java 11.
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 13.02.19 um 11:06 schrieb Jacopo Cappellato:
>>>> 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 by Oracle and distributed from:
>>>> https://jdk.java.net/11/
>>>>
>>>> In my opinion our README should point to it rather than:
>>>> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html
>>>> as it is now.
>>>> However, before we can do it, we have to resolve:
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10757
>>>> which should not be too difficult to achieve.
>>>>
>>>> Just my two cents,
>>>>
>>>> Jacopo
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 2:21 PM James Yong <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> 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 <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 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 <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>>> 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.atlassian.com/t5/Jira-discussions/Java-11-and-OpenJDK-support-for-Atlassian-Server-amp-Data-Center/m-p/872998#M4575
>>>>>>> On 2018/07/31 06:35:46, Jacques Le Roux <jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 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 favour of the embedded
>>>>> documentation. So I guess we will use the embedded documentation for
>>>>> lasting information, right?
>>>>>>>> BTW All, I want to close OFBIZ-9226 "Check that OFBiz runs and
>>>>> compile with Oracle JDK 9 (Java 9)" as unresolved and create a new
>>> similar
>>>>> issue for
>>>>>>>> Java 11, what do you think?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Le 28/07/2018 à 13:29, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>>>>>>>>> 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
>>> mind
>>>>> around it.
>>>>>>>>> This is just to make clear that I am not eager to switch to newer
>>>>> Java versions just for the sake of it.
>>>>>>>>> Am 28.07.18 um 12:54 schrieb Mathieu Lirzin:
>>>>>>>>>>> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or
>>>>> Java
>>>>>>>>>>> 11. We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to
>>>>> do it.
>>>>>>>>>>> Another way would be to make a new branch which will support
>>>>> Java 11.
>>>>>>>>>>> What do people think?
>>>>>>>>>> I think OFBiz should be conservative in its choices.
>>>>>>>>> I agree!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Given the fact Java 11 is not release yet or is about to be
>>>>> released,
>>>>>>>>> Java 11 will be released as GA in Sept 18. At the same time,
>>>>> non-subscribed users will get no updates for Java 8 any more.
>>>>>>>>>> OFBiz should keep compatibity with the previous LTS release
>>>>> meaning java 8. Of course
>>>>>>>>> Yes, you are right. If you focus on subscribed users, they will
>>>>> get Java 8 support until September 2023 (2026 for extended
>>> subscription).
>>>>>>>>> So following my thoughts to assume that users will subscribe, we
>>>>> can stay with Java 8 for a while.
>>>>>>>>> On the other hand, if we test Java 11 and find that we will have
>>>>> few issues we can easily handle, it could be a good idea to make the
>>> switch
>>>>> with
>>>>>>>>> release 17.12.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I am open to both (or other) models and would like to hear more
>>>>> opinions about that.
>>>>>>>>>> This does not mean that OFBiz should not be tested with more
>>>>> recent Java
>>>>>>>>>> releases too.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Having an extra branch has a maintenance burden that should be
>>>>> balanced
>>>>>>>>>> with the benefits it provides. What benefits do you see in
>>>>> having a
>>>>>>>>>> Java 11 branch?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> This is just an alternative to the Java 11 update of the next
>>>>> branch. I do not favor this because of the extra maintenance burden you
>>>>> mentioned.
>>>>>>>>> In conclusion, we can stick to Java 8, informing our users that
>>>>> they have to subscribe for further updates.
>>>>>>>>> If we do this, we should think about a roadmap/ process to change
>>>>> to Java 11 in the future. This could be, for example, set up during the
>>>>> release
>>>>>>>>> branch 21.x or 22.x to give us enough time.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> We should also, in my opinion, check/test for Java 11 and
>>>>> following versions compatibility in the next months to be able to inform
>>>>> users about
>>>>>>>>> compatibilities/incompatibilities with this version. Maybe we can
>>>>> provide some compatibility matrix or else.
>>>>>>>>> Thanks for your thoughts,
>>>>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>
>
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the
project
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
+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 <mi...@ecomify.de>
> 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 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 OFBiz
>> for the use of Java 11.
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> Am 13.02.19 um 11:06 schrieb Jacopo Cappellato:
>>> 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 by Oracle and distributed from:
>>> https://jdk.java.net/11/
>>>
>>> In my opinion our README should point to it rather than:
>>> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html
>>> as it is now.
>>> However, before we can do it, we have to resolve:
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10757
>>> which should not be too difficult to achieve.
>>>
>>> Just my two cents,
>>>
>>> Jacopo
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 2:21 PM James Yong <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 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 <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>> 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 <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>>>> 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.atlassian.com/t5/Jira-discussions/Java-11-and-OpenJDK-support-for-Atlassian-Server-amp-Data-Center/m-p/872998#M4575
>>>>>> On 2018/07/31 06:35:46, Jacques Le Roux <jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 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 favour of the embedded
>>>> documentation. So I guess we will use the embedded documentation for
>>>> lasting information, right?
>>>>>>> BTW All, I want to close OFBIZ-9226 "Check that OFBiz runs and
>>>> compile with Oracle JDK 9 (Java 9)" as unresolved and create a new
>> similar
>>>> issue for
>>>>>>> Java 11, what do you think?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Le 28/07/2018 à 13:29, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>>>>>>>> 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
>> mind
>>>> around it.
>>>>>>>> This is just to make clear that I am not eager to switch to newer
>>>> Java versions just for the sake of it.
>>>>>>>> Am 28.07.18 um 12:54 schrieb Mathieu Lirzin:
>>>>>>>>>> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or
>>>> Java
>>>>>>>>>> 11. We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to
>>>> do it.
>>>>>>>>>> Another way would be to make a new branch which will support
>>>> Java 11.
>>>>>>>>>> What do people think?
>>>>>>>>> I think OFBiz should be conservative in its choices.
>>>>>>>> I agree!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Given the fact Java 11 is not release yet or is about to be
>>>> released,
>>>>>>>> Java 11 will be released as GA in Sept 18. At the same time,
>>>> non-subscribed users will get no updates for Java 8 any more.
>>>>>>>>> OFBiz should keep compatibity with the previous LTS release
>>>> meaning java 8. Of course
>>>>>>>> Yes, you are right. If you focus on subscribed users, they will
>>>> get Java 8 support until September 2023 (2026 for extended
>> subscription).
>>>>>>>> So following my thoughts to assume that users will subscribe, we
>>>> can stay with Java 8 for a while.
>>>>>>>> On the other hand, if we test Java 11 and find that we will have
>>>> few issues we can easily handle, it could be a good idea to make the
>> switch
>>>> with
>>>>>>>> release 17.12.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I am open to both (or other) models and would like to hear more
>>>> opinions about that.
>>>>>>>>> This does not mean that OFBiz should not be tested with more
>>>> recent Java
>>>>>>>>> releases too.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Having an extra branch has a maintenance burden that should be
>>>> balanced
>>>>>>>>> with the benefits it provides. What benefits do you see in
>>>> having a
>>>>>>>>> Java 11 branch?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is just an alternative to the Java 11 update of the next
>>>> branch. I do not favor this because of the extra maintenance burden you
>>>> mentioned.
>>>>>>>> In conclusion, we can stick to Java 8, informing our users that
>>>> they have to subscribe for further updates.
>>>>>>>> If we do this, we should think about a roadmap/ process to change
>>>> to Java 11 in the future. This could be, for example, set up during the
>>>> release
>>>>>>>> branch 21.x or 22.x to give us enough time.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> We should also, in my opinion, check/test for Java 11 and
>>>> following versions compatibility in the next months to be able to inform
>>>> users about
>>>>>>>> compatibilities/incompatibilities with this version. Maybe we can
>>>> provide some compatibility matrix or else.
>>>>>>>> Thanks for your thoughts,
>>>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
Posted by Jacopo Cappellato <ja...@hotwaxsystems.com>.
Hi Michael,
yes AdoptOpenJDK is definitely a good fit.
Jacopo
On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 12:39 PM Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de>
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 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 OFBiz
> for the use of Java 11.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Michael
>
>
> Am 13.02.19 um 11:06 schrieb Jacopo Cappellato:
> > 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 by Oracle and distributed from:
> > https://jdk.java.net/11/
> >
> > In my opinion our README should point to it rather than:
> > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html
> > as it is now.
> > However, before we can do it, we have to resolve:
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10757
> > which should not be too difficult to achieve.
> >
> > Just my two cents,
> >
> > Jacopo
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 2:21 PM James Yong <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> 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 <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>> 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 <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>> 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.atlassian.com/t5/Jira-discussions/Java-11-and-OpenJDK-support-for-Atlassian-Server-amp-Data-Center/m-p/872998#M4575
> >>>>
> >>>> On 2018/07/31 06:35:46, Jacques Le Roux <jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>>>> 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 favour of the embedded
> >> documentation. So I guess we will use the embedded documentation for
> >> lasting information, right?
> >>>>> BTW All, I want to close OFBIZ-9226 "Check that OFBiz runs and
> >> compile with Oracle JDK 9 (Java 9)" as unresolved and create a new
> similar
> >> issue for
> >>>>> Java 11, what do you think?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jacques
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Le 28/07/2018 à 13:29, Michael Brohl a écrit :
> >>>>>> 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
> mind
> >> around it.
> >>>>>> This is just to make clear that I am not eager to switch to newer
> >> Java versions just for the sake of it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Am 28.07.18 um 12:54 schrieb Mathieu Lirzin:
> >>>>>>>> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or
> >> Java
> >>>>>>>> 11. We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to
> >> do it.
> >>>>>>>> Another way would be to make a new branch which will support
> >> Java 11.
> >>>>>>>> What do people think?
> >>>>>>> I think OFBiz should be conservative in its choices.
> >>>>>> I agree!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Given the fact Java 11 is not release yet or is about to be
> >> released,
> >>>>>> Java 11 will be released as GA in Sept 18. At the same time,
> >> non-subscribed users will get no updates for Java 8 any more.
> >>>>>>> OFBiz should keep compatibity with the previous LTS release
> >> meaning java 8. Of course
> >>>>>> Yes, you are right. If you focus on subscribed users, they will
> >> get Java 8 support until September 2023 (2026 for extended
> subscription).
> >>>>>> So following my thoughts to assume that users will subscribe, we
> >> can stay with Java 8 for a while.
> >>>>>> On the other hand, if we test Java 11 and find that we will have
> >> few issues we can easily handle, it could be a good idea to make the
> switch
> >> with
> >>>>>> release 17.12.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I am open to both (or other) models and would like to hear more
> >> opinions about that.
> >>>>>>> This does not mean that OFBiz should not be tested with more
> >> recent Java
> >>>>>>> releases too.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Having an extra branch has a maintenance burden that should be
> >> balanced
> >>>>>>> with the benefits it provides. What benefits do you see in
> >> having a
> >>>>>>> Java 11 branch?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> This is just an alternative to the Java 11 update of the next
> >> branch. I do not favor this because of the extra maintenance burden you
> >> mentioned.
> >>>>>> In conclusion, we can stick to Java 8, informing our users that
> >> they have to subscribe for further updates.
> >>>>>> If we do this, we should think about a roadmap/ process to change
> >> to Java 11 in the future. This could be, for example, set up during the
> >> release
> >>>>>> branch 21.x or 22.x to give us enough time.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We should also, in my opinion, check/test for Java 11 and
> >> following versions compatibility in the next months to be able to inform
> >> users about
> >>>>>> compatibilities/incompatibilities with this version. Maybe we can
> >> provide some compatibility matrix or else.
> >>>>>> Thanks for your thoughts,
> >>>>>> Michael
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
>
>
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
Posted by Deepak Dixit <de...@hotwax.co>.
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 <sl...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> 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 this problem.
>
> On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 2:39 PM Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de>
> 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 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 OFBiz
> > for the use of Java 11.
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Michael
> >
> >
> > Am 13.02.19 um 11:06 schrieb Jacopo Cappellato:
> > > 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 by Oracle and distributed from:
> > > https://jdk.java.net/11/
> > >
> > > In my opinion our README should point to it rather than:
> > > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html
> > > as it is now.
> > > However, before we can do it, we have to resolve:
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10757
> > > which should not be too difficult to achieve.
> > >
> > > Just my two cents,
> > >
> > > Jacopo
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 2:21 PM James Yong <ja...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> 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 <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >>> 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 <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >>>> 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.atlassian.com/t5/Jira-discussions/Java-11-and-OpenJDK-support-for-Atlassian-Server-amp-Data-Center/m-p/872998#M4575
> > >>>>
> > >>>> On 2018/07/31 06:35:46, Jacques Le Roux <
> jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >>>>> 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 favour of the embedded
> > >> documentation. So I guess we will use the embedded documentation for
> > >> lasting information, right?
> > >>>>> BTW All, I want to close OFBIZ-9226 "Check that OFBiz runs and
> > >> compile with Oracle JDK 9 (Java 9)" as unresolved and create a new
> similar
> > >> issue for
> > >>>>> Java 11, what do you think?
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Jacques
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>> Le 28/07/2018 à 13:29, Michael Brohl a écrit :
> > >>>>>> 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
> mind
> > >> around it.
> > >>>>>> This is just to make clear that I am not eager to switch to newer
> > >> Java versions just for the sake of it.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> Am 28.07.18 um 12:54 schrieb Mathieu Lirzin:
> > >>>>>>>> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or
> > >> Java
> > >>>>>>>> 11. We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to
> > >> do it.
> > >>>>>>>> Another way would be to make a new branch which will support
> > >> Java 11.
> > >>>>>>>> What do people think?
> > >>>>>>> I think OFBiz should be conservative in its choices.
> > >>>>>> I agree!
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Given the fact Java 11 is not release yet or is about to be
> > >> released,
> > >>>>>> Java 11 will be released as GA in Sept 18. At the same time,
> > >> non-subscribed users will get no updates for Java 8 any more.
> > >>>>>>> OFBiz should keep compatibity with the previous LTS release
> > >> meaning java 8. Of course
> > >>>>>> Yes, you are right. If you focus on subscribed users, they will
> > >> get Java 8 support until September 2023 (2026 for extended
> subscription).
> > >>>>>> So following my thoughts to assume that users will subscribe, we
> > >> can stay with Java 8 for a while.
> > >>>>>> On the other hand, if we test Java 11 and find that we will have
> > >> few issues we can easily handle, it could be a good idea to make the
> switch
> > >> with
> > >>>>>> release 17.12.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> I am open to both (or other) models and would like to hear more
> > >> opinions about that.
> > >>>>>>> This does not mean that OFBiz should not be tested with more
> > >> recent Java
> > >>>>>>> releases too.
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>>> Having an extra branch has a maintenance burden that should be
> > >> balanced
> > >>>>>>> with the benefits it provides. What benefits do you see in
> > >> having a
> > >>>>>>> Java 11 branch?
> > >>>>>>>
> > >>>>>> This is just an alternative to the Java 11 update of the next
> > >> branch. I do not favor this because of the extra maintenance burden
> you
> > >> mentioned.
> > >>>>>> In conclusion, we can stick to Java 8, informing our users that
> > >> they have to subscribe for further updates.
> > >>>>>> If we do this, we should think about a roadmap/ process to change
> > >> to Java 11 in the future. This could be, for example, set up during
> the
> > >> release
> > >>>>>> branch 21.x or 22.x to give us enough time.
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>> We should also, in my opinion, check/test for Java 11 and
> > >> following versions compatibility in the next months to be able to
> inform
> > >> users about
> > >>>>>> compatibilities/incompatibilities with this version. Maybe we can
> > >> provide some compatibility matrix or else.
> > >>>>>> Thanks for your thoughts,
> > >>>>>> Michael
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>>
> > >>>>>
> >
>
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
Posted by Jacopo Cappellato <ja...@hotwaxsystems.com>.
On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 12:51 PM Taher Alkhateeb <sl...@gmail.com>
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.
+1
Jacopo
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
Posted by Taher Alkhateeb <sl...@gmail.com>.
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 this problem.
On Wed, Feb 13, 2019 at 2:39 PM Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de> 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 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 OFBiz
> for the use of Java 11.
>
> Best regards,
>
> Michael
>
>
> Am 13.02.19 um 11:06 schrieb Jacopo Cappellato:
> > 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 by Oracle and distributed from:
> > https://jdk.java.net/11/
> >
> > In my opinion our README should point to it rather than:
> > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html
> > as it is now.
> > However, before we can do it, we have to resolve:
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10757
> > which should not be too difficult to achieve.
> >
> > Just my two cents,
> >
> > Jacopo
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 2:21 PM James Yong <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >> 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 <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>> 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 <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>>> 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.atlassian.com/t5/Jira-discussions/Java-11-and-OpenJDK-support-for-Atlassian-Server-amp-Data-Center/m-p/872998#M4575
> >>>>
> >>>> On 2018/07/31 06:35:46, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>>> 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 favour of the embedded
> >> documentation. So I guess we will use the embedded documentation for
> >> lasting information, right?
> >>>>> BTW All, I want to close OFBIZ-9226 "Check that OFBiz runs and
> >> compile with Oracle JDK 9 (Java 9)" as unresolved and create a new similar
> >> issue for
> >>>>> Java 11, what do you think?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Jacques
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Le 28/07/2018 à 13:29, Michael Brohl a écrit :
> >>>>>> 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 mind
> >> around it.
> >>>>>> This is just to make clear that I am not eager to switch to newer
> >> Java versions just for the sake of it.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Am 28.07.18 um 12:54 schrieb Mathieu Lirzin:
> >>>>>>>> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or
> >> Java
> >>>>>>>> 11. We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to
> >> do it.
> >>>>>>>> Another way would be to make a new branch which will support
> >> Java 11.
> >>>>>>>> What do people think?
> >>>>>>> I think OFBiz should be conservative in its choices.
> >>>>>> I agree!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Given the fact Java 11 is not release yet or is about to be
> >> released,
> >>>>>> Java 11 will be released as GA in Sept 18. At the same time,
> >> non-subscribed users will get no updates for Java 8 any more.
> >>>>>>> OFBiz should keep compatibity with the previous LTS release
> >> meaning java 8. Of course
> >>>>>> Yes, you are right. If you focus on subscribed users, they will
> >> get Java 8 support until September 2023 (2026 for extended subscription).
> >>>>>> So following my thoughts to assume that users will subscribe, we
> >> can stay with Java 8 for a while.
> >>>>>> On the other hand, if we test Java 11 and find that we will have
> >> few issues we can easily handle, it could be a good idea to make the switch
> >> with
> >>>>>> release 17.12.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I am open to both (or other) models and would like to hear more
> >> opinions about that.
> >>>>>>> This does not mean that OFBiz should not be tested with more
> >> recent Java
> >>>>>>> releases too.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Having an extra branch has a maintenance burden that should be
> >> balanced
> >>>>>>> with the benefits it provides. What benefits do you see in
> >> having a
> >>>>>>> Java 11 branch?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> This is just an alternative to the Java 11 update of the next
> >> branch. I do not favor this because of the extra maintenance burden you
> >> mentioned.
> >>>>>> In conclusion, we can stick to Java 8, informing our users that
> >> they have to subscribe for further updates.
> >>>>>> If we do this, we should think about a roadmap/ process to change
> >> to Java 11 in the future. This could be, for example, set up during the
> >> release
> >>>>>> branch 21.x or 22.x to give us enough time.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> We should also, in my opinion, check/test for Java 11 and
> >> following versions compatibility in the next months to be able to inform
> >> users about
> >>>>>> compatibilities/incompatibilities with this version. Maybe we can
> >> provide some compatibility matrix or else.
> >>>>>> Thanks for your thoughts,
> >>>>>> Michael
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
>
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the
project
Posted by Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de>.
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 OFBiz
for the use of Java 11.
Best regards,
Michael
Am 13.02.19 um 11:06 schrieb Jacopo Cappellato:
> 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 by Oracle and distributed from:
> https://jdk.java.net/11/
>
> In my opinion our README should point to it rather than:
> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html
> as it is now.
> However, before we can do it, we have to resolve:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10757
> which should not be too difficult to achieve.
>
> Just my two cents,
>
> Jacopo
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 2:21 PM James Yong <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> 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 <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> 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 <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>> 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.atlassian.com/t5/Jira-discussions/Java-11-and-OpenJDK-support-for-Atlassian-Server-amp-Data-Center/m-p/872998#M4575
>>>>
>>>> On 2018/07/31 06:35:46, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>> 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 favour of the embedded
>> documentation. So I guess we will use the embedded documentation for
>> lasting information, right?
>>>>> BTW All, I want to close OFBIZ-9226 "Check that OFBiz runs and
>> compile with Oracle JDK 9 (Java 9)" as unresolved and create a new similar
>> issue for
>>>>> Java 11, what do you think?
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Le 28/07/2018 à 13:29, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>>>>>> 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 mind
>> around it.
>>>>>> This is just to make clear that I am not eager to switch to newer
>> Java versions just for the sake of it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Am 28.07.18 um 12:54 schrieb Mathieu Lirzin:
>>>>>>>> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or
>> Java
>>>>>>>> 11. We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to
>> do it.
>>>>>>>> Another way would be to make a new branch which will support
>> Java 11.
>>>>>>>> What do people think?
>>>>>>> I think OFBiz should be conservative in its choices.
>>>>>> I agree!
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Given the fact Java 11 is not release yet or is about to be
>> released,
>>>>>> Java 11 will be released as GA in Sept 18. At the same time,
>> non-subscribed users will get no updates for Java 8 any more.
>>>>>>> OFBiz should keep compatibity with the previous LTS release
>> meaning java 8. Of course
>>>>>> Yes, you are right. If you focus on subscribed users, they will
>> get Java 8 support until September 2023 (2026 for extended subscription).
>>>>>> So following my thoughts to assume that users will subscribe, we
>> can stay with Java 8 for a while.
>>>>>> On the other hand, if we test Java 11 and find that we will have
>> few issues we can easily handle, it could be a good idea to make the switch
>> with
>>>>>> release 17.12.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I am open to both (or other) models and would like to hear more
>> opinions about that.
>>>>>>> This does not mean that OFBiz should not be tested with more
>> recent Java
>>>>>>> releases too.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Having an extra branch has a maintenance burden that should be
>> balanced
>>>>>>> with the benefits it provides. What benefits do you see in
>> having a
>>>>>>> Java 11 branch?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is just an alternative to the Java 11 update of the next
>> branch. I do not favor this because of the extra maintenance burden you
>> mentioned.
>>>>>> In conclusion, we can stick to Java 8, informing our users that
>> they have to subscribe for further updates.
>>>>>> If we do this, we should think about a roadmap/ process to change
>> to Java 11 in the future. This could be, for example, set up during the
>> release
>>>>>> branch 21.x or 22.x to give us enough time.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We should also, in my opinion, check/test for Java 11 and
>> following versions compatibility in the next months to be able to inform
>> users about
>>>>>> compatibilities/incompatibilities with this version. Maybe we can
>> provide some compatibility matrix or else.
>>>>>> Thanks for your thoughts,
>>>>>> Michael
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
Posted by Jacopo Cappellato <ja...@hotwaxsystems.com>.
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 by Oracle and distributed from:
https://jdk.java.net/11/
In my opinion our README should point to it rather than:
http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/downloads/index.html
as it is now.
However, before we can do it, we have to resolve:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-10757
which should not be too difficult to achieve.
Just my two cents,
Jacopo
On Wed, Oct 24, 2018 at 2:21 PM James Yong <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> 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 <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > 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 <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > 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.atlassian.com/t5/Jira-discussions/Java-11-and-OpenJDK-support-for-Atlassian-Server-amp-Data-Center/m-p/872998#M4575
> > >
> > >
> > > On 2018/07/31 06:35:46, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>
> wrote:
> > > > 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 favour of the embedded
> documentation. So I guess we will use the embedded documentation for
> lasting information, right?
> > > >
> > > > BTW All, I want to close OFBIZ-9226 "Check that OFBiz runs and
> compile with Oracle JDK 9 (Java 9)" as unresolved and create a new similar
> issue for
> > > > Java 11, what do you think?
> > > >
> > > > Jacques
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Le 28/07/2018 à 13:29, Michael Brohl a écrit :
> > > > > 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 mind
> around it.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is just to make clear that I am not eager to switch to newer
> Java versions just for the sake of it.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Am 28.07.18 um 12:54 schrieb Mathieu Lirzin:
> > > > >>> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or
> Java
> > > > >>> 11. We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to
> do it.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> Another way would be to make a new branch which will support
> Java 11.
> > > > >>>
> > > > >>> What do people think?
> > > > >> I think OFBiz should be conservative in its choices.
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree!
> > > > >
> > > > >> Given the fact Java 11 is not release yet or is about to be
> released,
> > > > >
> > > > > Java 11 will be released as GA in Sept 18. At the same time,
> non-subscribed users will get no updates for Java 8 any more.
> > > > >
> > > > >> OFBiz should keep compatibity with the previous LTS release
> meaning java 8. Of course
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, you are right. If you focus on subscribed users, they will
> get Java 8 support until September 2023 (2026 for extended subscription).
> > > > > So following my thoughts to assume that users will subscribe, we
> can stay with Java 8 for a while.
> > > > >
> > > > > On the other hand, if we test Java 11 and find that we will have
> few issues we can easily handle, it could be a good idea to make the switch
> with
> > > > > release 17.12.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am open to both (or other) models and would like to hear more
> opinions about that.
> > > > >
> > > > >> This does not mean that OFBiz should not be tested with more
> recent Java
> > > > >> releases too.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Having an extra branch has a maintenance burden that should be
> balanced
> > > > >> with the benefits it provides. What benefits do you see in
> having a
> > > > >> Java 11 branch?
> > > > >>
> > > > > This is just an alternative to the Java 11 update of the next
> branch. I do not favor this because of the extra maintenance burden you
> mentioned.
> > > > >
> > > > > In conclusion, we can stick to Java 8, informing our users that
> they have to subscribe for further updates.
> > > > >
> > > > > If we do this, we should think about a roadmap/ process to change
> to Java 11 in the future. This could be, for example, set up during the
> release
> > > > > branch 21.x or 22.x to give us enough time.
> > > > >
> > > > > We should also, in my opinion, check/test for Java 11 and
> following versions compatibility in the next months to be able to inform
> users about
> > > > > compatibilities/incompatibilities with this version. Maybe we can
> provide some compatibility matrix or else.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for your thoughts,
> > > > > Michael
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
Posted by James Yong <ja...@apache.org>.
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 <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> 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 <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> > 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.atlassian.com/t5/Jira-discussions/Java-11-and-OpenJDK-support-for-Atlassian-Server-amp-Data-Center/m-p/872998#M4575
> >
> >
> > On 2018/07/31 06:35:46, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
> > > 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 favour of the embedded documentation. So I guess we will use the embedded documentation for lasting information, right?
> > >
> > > BTW All, I want to close OFBIZ-9226 "Check that OFBiz runs and compile with Oracle JDK 9 (Java 9)" as unresolved and create a new similar issue for
> > > Java 11, what do you think?
> > >
> > > Jacques
> > >
> > >
> > > Le 28/07/2018 à 13:29, Michael Brohl a écrit :
> > > > 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 mind around it.
> > > >
> > > > This is just to make clear that I am not eager to switch to newer Java versions just for the sake of it.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Am 28.07.18 um 12:54 schrieb Mathieu Lirzin:
> > > >>> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or Java
> > > >>> 11. We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to do it.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> Another way would be to make a new branch which will support Java 11.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> What do people think?
> > > >> I think OFBiz should be conservative in its choices.
> > > >
> > > > I agree!
> > > >
> > > >> Given the fact Java 11 is not release yet or is about to be released,
> > > >
> > > > Java 11 will be released as GA in Sept 18. At the same time, non-subscribed users will get no updates for Java 8 any more.
> > > >
> > > >> OFBiz should keep compatibity with the previous LTS release meaning java 8. Of course
> > > >
> > > > Yes, you are right. If you focus on subscribed users, they will get Java 8 support until September 2023 (2026 for extended subscription).
> > > > So following my thoughts to assume that users will subscribe, we can stay with Java 8 for a while.
> > > >
> > > > On the other hand, if we test Java 11 and find that we will have few issues we can easily handle, it could be a good idea to make the switch with
> > > > release 17.12.
> > > >
> > > > I am open to both (or other) models and would like to hear more opinions about that.
> > > >
> > > >> This does not mean that OFBiz should not be tested with more recent Java
> > > >> releases too.
> > > >>
> > > >> Having an extra branch has a maintenance burden that should be balanced
> > > >> with the benefits it provides. What benefits do you see in having a
> > > >> Java 11 branch?
> > > >>
> > > > This is just an alternative to the Java 11 update of the next branch. I do not favor this because of the extra maintenance burden you mentioned.
> > > >
> > > > In conclusion, we can stick to Java 8, informing our users that they have to subscribe for further updates.
> > > >
> > > > If we do this, we should think about a roadmap/ process to change to Java 11 in the future. This could be, for example, set up during the release
> > > > branch 21.x or 22.x to give us enough time.
> > > >
> > > > We should also, in my opinion, check/test for Java 11 and following versions compatibility in the next months to be able to inform users about
> > > > compatibilities/incompatibilities with this version. Maybe we can provide some compatibility matrix or else.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your thoughts,
> > > > Michael
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
Posted by James Yong <ja...@apache.org>.
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 <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> 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.atlassian.com/t5/Jira-discussions/Java-11-and-OpenJDK-support-for-Atlassian-Server-amp-Data-Center/m-p/872998#M4575
>
>
> On 2018/07/31 06:35:46, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
> > 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 favour of the embedded documentation. So I guess we will use the embedded documentation for lasting information, right?
> >
> > BTW All, I want to close OFBIZ-9226 "Check that OFBiz runs and compile with Oracle JDK 9 (Java 9)" as unresolved and create a new similar issue for
> > Java 11, what do you think?
> >
> > Jacques
> >
> >
> > Le 28/07/2018 à 13:29, Michael Brohl a écrit :
> > > 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 mind around it.
> > >
> > > This is just to make clear that I am not eager to switch to newer Java versions just for the sake of it.
> > >
> > >
> > > Am 28.07.18 um 12:54 schrieb Mathieu Lirzin:
> > >>> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or Java
> > >>> 11. We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to do it.
> > >>>
> > >>> Another way would be to make a new branch which will support Java 11.
> > >>>
> > >>> What do people think?
> > >> I think OFBiz should be conservative in its choices.
> > >
> > > I agree!
> > >
> > >> Given the fact Java 11 is not release yet or is about to be released,
> > >
> > > Java 11 will be released as GA in Sept 18. At the same time, non-subscribed users will get no updates for Java 8 any more.
> > >
> > >> OFBiz should keep compatibity with the previous LTS release meaning java 8. Of course
> > >
> > > Yes, you are right. If you focus on subscribed users, they will get Java 8 support until September 2023 (2026 for extended subscription).
> > > So following my thoughts to assume that users will subscribe, we can stay with Java 8 for a while.
> > >
> > > On the other hand, if we test Java 11 and find that we will have few issues we can easily handle, it could be a good idea to make the switch with
> > > release 17.12.
> > >
> > > I am open to both (or other) models and would like to hear more opinions about that.
> > >
> > >> This does not mean that OFBiz should not be tested with more recent Java
> > >> releases too.
> > >>
> > >> Having an extra branch has a maintenance burden that should be balanced
> > >> with the benefits it provides. What benefits do you see in having a
> > >> Java 11 branch?
> > >>
> > > This is just an alternative to the Java 11 update of the next branch. I do not favor this because of the extra maintenance burden you mentioned.
> > >
> > > In conclusion, we can stick to Java 8, informing our users that they have to subscribe for further updates.
> > >
> > > If we do this, we should think about a roadmap/ process to change to Java 11 in the future. This could be, for example, set up during the release
> > > branch 21.x or 22.x to give us enough time.
> > >
> > > We should also, in my opinion, check/test for Java 11 and following versions compatibility in the next months to be able to inform users about
> > > compatibilities/incompatibilities with this version. Maybe we can provide some compatibility matrix or else.
> > >
> > > Thanks for your thoughts,
> > > Michael
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
Posted by James Yong <ja...@apache.org>.
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.atlassian.com/t5/Jira-discussions/Java-11-and-OpenJDK-support-for-Atlassian-Server-amp-Data-Center/m-p/872998#M4575
On 2018/07/31 06:35:46, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> wrote:
> 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 favour of the embedded documentation. So I guess we will use the embedded documentation for lasting information, right?
>
> BTW All, I want to close OFBIZ-9226 "Check that OFBiz runs and compile with Oracle JDK 9 (Java 9)" as unresolved and create a new similar issue for
> Java 11, what do you think?
>
> Jacques
>
>
> Le 28/07/2018 à 13:29, Michael Brohl a écrit :
> > 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 mind around it.
> >
> > This is just to make clear that I am not eager to switch to newer Java versions just for the sake of it.
> >
> >
> > Am 28.07.18 um 12:54 schrieb Mathieu Lirzin:
> >>> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or Java
> >>> 11. We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to do it.
> >>>
> >>> Another way would be to make a new branch which will support Java 11.
> >>>
> >>> What do people think?
> >> I think OFBiz should be conservative in its choices.
> >
> > I agree!
> >
> >> Given the fact Java 11 is not release yet or is about to be released,
> >
> > Java 11 will be released as GA in Sept 18. At the same time, non-subscribed users will get no updates for Java 8 any more.
> >
> >> OFBiz should keep compatibity with the previous LTS release meaning java 8. Of course
> >
> > Yes, you are right. If you focus on subscribed users, they will get Java 8 support until September 2023 (2026 for extended subscription).
> > So following my thoughts to assume that users will subscribe, we can stay with Java 8 for a while.
> >
> > On the other hand, if we test Java 11 and find that we will have few issues we can easily handle, it could be a good idea to make the switch with
> > release 17.12.
> >
> > I am open to both (or other) models and would like to hear more opinions about that.
> >
> >> This does not mean that OFBiz should not be tested with more recent Java
> >> releases too.
> >>
> >> Having an extra branch has a maintenance burden that should be balanced
> >> with the benefits it provides. What benefits do you see in having a
> >> Java 11 branch?
> >>
> > This is just an alternative to the Java 11 update of the next branch. I do not favor this because of the extra maintenance burden you mentioned.
> >
> > In conclusion, we can stick to Java 8, informing our users that they have to subscribe for further updates.
> >
> > If we do this, we should think about a roadmap/ process to change to Java 11 in the future. This could be, for example, set up during the release
> > branch 21.x or 22.x to give us enough time.
> >
> > We should also, in my opinion, check/test for Java 11 and following versions compatibility in the next months to be able to inform users about
> > compatibilities/incompatibilities with this version. Maybe we can provide some compatibility matrix or else.
> >
> > Thanks for your thoughts,
> > Michael
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the
project
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
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 favour of the embedded documentation. So I guess we will use the embedded documentation for lasting information, right?
BTW All, I want to close OFBIZ-9226 "Check that OFBiz runs and compile with Oracle JDK 9 (Java 9)" as unresolved and create a new similar issue for
Java 11, what do you think?
Jacques
Le 28/07/2018 à 13:29, Michael Brohl a écrit :
> 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 mind around it.
>
> This is just to make clear that I am not eager to switch to newer Java versions just for the sake of it.
>
>
> Am 28.07.18 um 12:54 schrieb Mathieu Lirzin:
>>> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or Java
>>> 11. We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to do it.
>>>
>>> Another way would be to make a new branch which will support Java 11.
>>>
>>> What do people think?
>> I think OFBiz should be conservative in its choices.
>
> I agree!
>
>> Given the fact Java 11 is not release yet or is about to be released,
>
> Java 11 will be released as GA in Sept 18. At the same time, non-subscribed users will get no updates for Java 8 any more.
>
>> OFBiz should keep compatibity with the previous LTS release meaning java 8. Of course
>
> Yes, you are right. If you focus on subscribed users, they will get Java 8 support until September 2023 (2026 for extended subscription).
> So following my thoughts to assume that users will subscribe, we can stay with Java 8 for a while.
>
> On the other hand, if we test Java 11 and find that we will have few issues we can easily handle, it could be a good idea to make the switch with
> release 17.12.
>
> I am open to both (or other) models and would like to hear more opinions about that.
>
>> This does not mean that OFBiz should not be tested with more recent Java
>> releases too.
>>
>> Having an extra branch has a maintenance burden that should be balanced
>> with the benefits it provides. What benefits do you see in having a
>> Java 11 branch?
>>
> This is just an alternative to the Java 11 update of the next branch. I do not favor this because of the extra maintenance burden you mentioned.
>
> In conclusion, we can stick to Java 8, informing our users that they have to subscribe for further updates.
>
> If we do this, we should think about a roadmap/ process to change to Java 11 in the future. This could be, for example, set up during the release
> branch 21.x or 22.x to give us enough time.
>
> We should also, in my opinion, check/test for Java 11 and following versions compatibility in the next months to be able to inform users about
> compatibilities/incompatibilities with this version. Maybe we can provide some compatibility matrix or else.
>
> Thanks for your thoughts,
> Michael
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the
project
Posted by Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de>.
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 mind around it.
This is just to make clear that I am not eager to switch to newer Java
versions just for the sake of it.
Am 28.07.18 um 12:54 schrieb Mathieu Lirzin:
>> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or Java
>> 11. We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to do it.
>>
>> Another way would be to make a new branch which will support Java 11.
>>
>> What do people think?
> I think OFBiz should be conservative in its choices.
I agree!
> Given the fact Java 11 is not release yet or is about to be released,
Java 11 will be released as GA in Sept 18. At the same time,
non-subscribed users will get no updates for Java 8 any more.
> OFBiz should keep compatibity with the previous LTS release meaning java 8. Of course
Yes, you are right. If you focus on subscribed users, they will get Java
8 support until September 2023 (2026 for extended subscription).
So following my thoughts to assume that users will subscribe, we can
stay with Java 8 for a while.
On the other hand, if we test Java 11 and find that we will have few
issues we can easily handle, it could be a good idea to make the switch
with release 17.12.
I am open to both (or other) models and would like to hear more opinions
about that.
> This does not mean that OFBiz should not be tested with more recent Java
> releases too.
>
> Having an extra branch has a maintenance burden that should be balanced
> with the benefits it provides. What benefits do you see in having a
> Java 11 branch?
>
This is just an alternative to the Java 11 update of the next branch. I
do not favor this because of the extra maintenance burden you mentioned.
In conclusion, we can stick to Java 8, informing our users that they
have to subscribe for further updates.
If we do this, we should think about a roadmap/ process to change to
Java 11 in the future. This could be, for example, set up during the
release branch 21.x or 22.x to give us enough time.
We should also, in my opinion, check/test for Java 11 and following
versions compatibility in the next months to be able to inform users
about compatibilities/incompatibilities with this version. Maybe we can
provide some compatibility matrix or else.
Thanks for your thoughts,
Michael
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
Posted by Mathieu Lirzin <ma...@nereide.fr>.
Hello Michael,
Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de> 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 will go through a repeating 6 month "early access - update -
> test - go live" circle for free Java versions.
>
> Java 11 EA is available [2] so we could start to test with it.
>
> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or Java
> 11. We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to do it.
>
> Another way would be to make a new branch which will support Java 11.
>
> What do people think?
I think OFBiz should be conservative in its choices. Given the fact
Java 11 is not release yet or is about to be released, OFBiz should keep
compatibity with the previous LTS release meaning java 8. Of course
This does not mean that OFBiz should not be tested with more recent Java
releases too.
Having an extra branch has a maintenance burden that should be balanced
with the benefits it provides. What benefits do you see in having a
Java 11 branch?
--
Mathieu Lirzin
GPG: F2A3 8D7E EB2B 6640 5761 070D 0ADE E100 9460 4D37
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the
project
Posted by st...@comcast.net.
For what it's worth (nobody here knows me), +1 for OpenJDK.
----- Original Message -----From: Taher Alkhateeb <sl...@gmail.com>To: OFBIZ Development Mailing List <de...@ofbiz.apache.org>Sent: Sat, 28 Jul 2018 08:06:44 -0000 (UTC)Subject: Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
I am beginning to wonder if we should consider moving to OpenJDK. I think Ireally dislike this release model with all the extra costs and headacheinvolved.
Are we stuck with Oracle JDK? Does anyone know of limitations or problemswith OpenJDK? I vaguely remember font problems with the BIRT plugin but Icannot recall any serious issues.
On Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 10:56 AM Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de>wrote:
> 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 "early access - update - test - go live"> circle for free Java versions.>> Java 11 EA is available [2] so we could start to test with it.>> The latest Intellij Idea already has support for Java 11, I suppose that> it will come for Eclipse Photon shortly also.>> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or Java 11.> We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to do it.>> Another way would be to make a new branch which will support Java 11.>> What do people think?>> Best regards,>> Michael Brohl> ecomify GmbH> www.ecomify.de>>> [1]>> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javaseproducts/overview/javasesubscriptionfaq-4891443.html>> [2] http://jdk.java.net/11/>>>>> Michael Brohl> Geschäftsführer>> Fon +49 521 448 157-91> Fax +49 521 448 157-99> Mobil +49 160 3664918> Xing xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl> LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl>> Company and Management Headquarters:> ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland> Fon: +49 521 448157-90, Fax: +49 521 448157-99, www.ecomify.de>> Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683> Chief Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl>> Am 29.01.18 um 17:21 schrieb Michael Brohl:> > 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 release is> > published, if I understand correctly.> >> > We'll have to discuss if this affects the project in terms of support> > for the latest public Java releases. If we want to stay up-to-date> > according to the public releases, we'll have to establish a process to> > early check the new features and changes of a coming release and maybe> > release more often.> >> > We might even have to support the latest Java release along with the> > current LTS release to cover both users with and without commercial> > support? I'm not sure.> >> > What do you think?> >> > Best regards,> >> > Michael> >> > [1] https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/> >> >> >>>>
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the
project
Posted by Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de>.
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 you,
Michael Brohl
ecomify GmbH
www.ecomify.de
Am 28.07.18 um 11:29 schrieb Taher Alkhateeb:
> 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 work because of the space between "ofbiz" and "--start" and
> that's why I created a JIRA for this issue [1]. I'm not sure what is
> the best solution, one idea that came to me is perhaps to pass the
> args to a string. So for example:
>
> ./gradlew ofbiz -Pcmd1="--load-data readers=seed" ofbiz
> -Pcmd2="--start --portoffset=10000"
>
> Maybe another option is to just run one "ofbiz" task and then pass
> multiple commands each in a project paramter -Pcmd1= -Pcmd2= -Pcmd3=
> ... Another option is to hard wire all commands like we did back in
> Ant days.
>
> I'm not sure what is the best solution there, and I don't mean to
> hijack this thread, but one thing depends on another thing. Should we
> start a new thread for that? Collect ideas from the community?
>
> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-9972
>
> On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 11:47 AM, Michael Brohl
> <mi...@ecomify.de> wrote:
>> 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 it's unclear to me how long
>> the versions will be supported.
>>
>> I think Linux distributions will follow the LTS release cycle also, because
>> of the same reasons. Here's a statement for Red Hat:
>> https://access.redhat.com/articles/1299013 (at the bottom).
>>
>> Most sources of information describe the Open JDK as a reference
>> implementation which is less stable than the Oracle JDK.
>>
>> Personally, I have almost no experience using Open JDK in productive,
>> professional environments. There were problems years ago which I do not
>> remember exactly and we use Oracle JDK since then.
>>
>> I think we should support Oracle JDK because professional users most likely
>> will use it and it would be a bad sign if OFBiz shows no official support
>> for it.
>>
>> I also don't like the release model but the costs are moderate and using the
>> LTS version, there is no headache feature wise. Java 11 LTS will be stable
>> until 2023 or 2026 if you choose the extended subscription. Lots of time to
>> prepare for the next LTS version...
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Michael Brohl
>> ecomify GmbH
>> www.ecomify.de
>>
>>
>> Am 28.07.18 um 10:06 schrieb Taher Alkhateeb:
>>
>>> 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 plugin but I
>>> cannot recall any serious issues.
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 10:56 AM Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> 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 "early access - update - test - go live"
>>>> circle for free Java versions.
>>>>
>>>> Java 11 EA is available [2] so we could start to test with it.
>>>>
>>>> The latest Intellij Idea already has support for Java 11, I suppose that
>>>> it will come for Eclipse Photon shortly also.
>>>>
>>>> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or Java 11.
>>>> We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to do it.
>>>>
>>>> Another way would be to make a new branch which will support Java 11.
>>>>
>>>> What do people think?
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> Michael Brohl
>>>> ecomify GmbH
>>>> www.ecomify.de
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> [1]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javaseproducts/overview/javasesubscriptionfaq-4891443.html
>>>>
>>>> [2] http://jdk.java.net/11/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Michael Brohl
>>>> Geschäftsführer
>>>>
>>>> Fon +49 521 448 157-91
>>>> Fax +49 521 448 157-99
>>>> Mobil +49 160 3664918
>>>> Xing xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl
>>>> LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl
>>>>
>>>> Company and Management Headquarters:
>>>> ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland
>>>> Fon: +49 521 448157-90, Fax: +49 521 448157-99, www.ecomify.de
>>>>
>>>> Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683
>>>> Chief Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl
>>>>
>>>> Am 29.01.18 um 17:21 schrieb Michael Brohl:
>>>>> 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 release is
>>>>> published, if I understand correctly.
>>>>>
>>>>> We'll have to discuss if this affects the project in terms of support
>>>>> for the latest public Java releases. If we want to stay up-to-date
>>>>> according to the public releases, we'll have to establish a process to
>>>>> early check the new features and changes of a coming release and maybe
>>>>> release more often.
>>>>>
>>>>> We might even have to support the latest Java release along with the
>>>>> current LTS release to cover both users with and without commercial
>>>>> support? I'm not sure.
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you think?
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Michael
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
Posted by Taher Alkhateeb <sl...@gmail.com>.
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 work because of the space between "ofbiz" and "--start" and
that's why I created a JIRA for this issue [1]. I'm not sure what is
the best solution, one idea that came to me is perhaps to pass the
args to a string. So for example:
./gradlew ofbiz -Pcmd1="--load-data readers=seed" ofbiz
-Pcmd2="--start --portoffset=10000"
Maybe another option is to just run one "ofbiz" task and then pass
multiple commands each in a project paramter -Pcmd1= -Pcmd2= -Pcmd3=
... Another option is to hard wire all commands like we did back in
Ant days.
I'm not sure what is the best solution there, and I don't mean to
hijack this thread, but one thing depends on another thing. Should we
start a new thread for that? Collect ideas from the community?
[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-9972
On Sat, Jul 28, 2018 at 11:47 AM, Michael Brohl
<mi...@ecomify.de> wrote:
> 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 it's unclear to me how long
> the versions will be supported.
>
> I think Linux distributions will follow the LTS release cycle also, because
> of the same reasons. Here's a statement for Red Hat:
> https://access.redhat.com/articles/1299013 (at the bottom).
>
> Most sources of information describe the Open JDK as a reference
> implementation which is less stable than the Oracle JDK.
>
> Personally, I have almost no experience using Open JDK in productive,
> professional environments. There were problems years ago which I do not
> remember exactly and we use Oracle JDK since then.
>
> I think we should support Oracle JDK because professional users most likely
> will use it and it would be a bad sign if OFBiz shows no official support
> for it.
>
> I also don't like the release model but the costs are moderate and using the
> LTS version, there is no headache feature wise. Java 11 LTS will be stable
> until 2023 or 2026 if you choose the extended subscription. Lots of time to
> prepare for the next LTS version...
>
> Best regards,
>
> Michael Brohl
> ecomify GmbH
> www.ecomify.de
>
>
> Am 28.07.18 um 10:06 schrieb Taher Alkhateeb:
>
>> 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 plugin but I
>> cannot recall any serious issues.
>>
>> On Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 10:56 AM Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> 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 "early access - update - test - go live"
>>> circle for free Java versions.
>>>
>>> Java 11 EA is available [2] so we could start to test with it.
>>>
>>> The latest Intellij Idea already has support for Java 11, I suppose that
>>> it will come for Eclipse Photon shortly also.
>>>
>>> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or Java 11.
>>> We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to do it.
>>>
>>> Another way would be to make a new branch which will support Java 11.
>>>
>>> What do people think?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Michael Brohl
>>> ecomify GmbH
>>> www.ecomify.de
>>>
>>>
>>> [1]
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javaseproducts/overview/javasesubscriptionfaq-4891443.html
>>>
>>> [2] http://jdk.java.net/11/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Michael Brohl
>>> Geschäftsführer
>>>
>>> Fon +49 521 448 157-91
>>> Fax +49 521 448 157-99
>>> Mobil +49 160 3664918
>>> Xing xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl
>>> LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl
>>>
>>> Company and Management Headquarters:
>>> ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland
>>> Fon: +49 521 448157-90, Fax: +49 521 448157-99, www.ecomify.de
>>>
>>> Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683
>>> Chief Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl
>>>
>>> Am 29.01.18 um 17:21 schrieb Michael Brohl:
>>>>
>>>> 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 release is
>>>> published, if I understand correctly.
>>>>
>>>> We'll have to discuss if this affects the project in terms of support
>>>> for the latest public Java releases. If we want to stay up-to-date
>>>> according to the public releases, we'll have to establish a process to
>>>> early check the new features and changes of a coming release and maybe
>>>> release more often.
>>>>
>>>> We might even have to support the latest Java release along with the
>>>> current LTS release to cover both users with and without commercial
>>>> support? I'm not sure.
>>>>
>>>> What do you think?
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>>
>>>> Michael
>>>>
>>>> [1] https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the
project
Posted by Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de>.
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 it's unclear to me how
long the versions will be supported.
I think Linux distributions will follow the LTS release cycle also,
because of the same reasons. Here's a statement for Red Hat:
https://access.redhat.com/articles/1299013 (at the bottom).
Most sources of information describe the Open JDK as a reference
implementation which is less stable than the Oracle JDK.
Personally, I have almost no experience using Open JDK in productive,
professional environments. There were problems years ago which I do not
remember exactly and we use Oracle JDK since then.
I think we should support Oracle JDK because professional users most
likely will use it and it would be a bad sign if OFBiz shows no official
support for it.
I also don't like the release model but the costs are moderate and using
the LTS version, there is no headache feature wise. Java 11 LTS will be
stable until 2023 or 2026 if you choose the extended subscription. Lots
of time to prepare for the next LTS version...
Best regards,
Michael Brohl
ecomify GmbH
www.ecomify.de
Am 28.07.18 um 10:06 schrieb Taher Alkhateeb:
> 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 plugin but I
> cannot recall any serious issues.
>
> On Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 10:56 AM Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de>
> wrote:
>
>> 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 "early access - update - test - go live"
>> circle for free Java versions.
>>
>> Java 11 EA is available [2] so we could start to test with it.
>>
>> The latest Intellij Idea already has support for Java 11, I suppose that
>> it will come for Eclipse Photon shortly also.
>>
>> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or Java 11.
>> We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to do it.
>>
>> Another way would be to make a new branch which will support Java 11.
>>
>> What do people think?
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Michael Brohl
>> ecomify GmbH
>> www.ecomify.de
>>
>>
>> [1]
>>
>> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javaseproducts/overview/javasesubscriptionfaq-4891443.html
>>
>> [2] http://jdk.java.net/11/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Michael Brohl
>> Geschäftsführer
>>
>> Fon +49 521 448 157-91
>> Fax +49 521 448 157-99
>> Mobil +49 160 3664918
>> Xing xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl
>> LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl
>>
>> Company and Management Headquarters:
>> ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland
>> Fon: +49 521 448157-90, Fax: +49 521 448157-99, www.ecomify.de
>>
>> Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683
>> Chief Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl
>>
>> Am 29.01.18 um 17:21 schrieb Michael Brohl:
>>> 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 release is
>>> published, if I understand correctly.
>>>
>>> We'll have to discuss if this affects the project in terms of support
>>> for the latest public Java releases. If we want to stay up-to-date
>>> according to the public releases, we'll have to establish a process to
>>> early check the new features and changes of a coming release and maybe
>>> release more often.
>>>
>>> We might even have to support the latest Java release along with the
>>> current LTS release to cover both users with and without commercial
>>> support? I'm not sure.
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>>> [1] https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
Re: Oracle Java release model changes and consequences for the project
Posted by Taher Alkhateeb <sl...@gmail.com>.
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 plugin but I
cannot recall any serious issues.
On Sat, Jul 28, 2018, 10:56 AM Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de>
wrote:
> 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 "early access - update - test - go live"
> circle for free Java versions.
>
> Java 11 EA is available [2] so we could start to test with it.
>
> The latest Intellij Idea already has support for Java 11, I suppose that
> it will come for Eclipse Photon shortly also.
>
> I wonder if we should base the OFBiz 17.12 release on Java 8 or Java 11.
> We have no fixed release date yet so we might have time to do it.
>
> Another way would be to make a new branch which will support Java 11.
>
> What do people think?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Michael Brohl
> ecomify GmbH
> www.ecomify.de
>
>
> [1]
>
> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javaseproducts/overview/javasesubscriptionfaq-4891443.html
>
> [2] http://jdk.java.net/11/
>
>
>
>
> Michael Brohl
> Geschäftsführer
>
> Fon +49 521 448 157-91
> Fax +49 521 448 157-99
> Mobil +49 160 3664918
> Xing xing.com/profile/Michael_Brohl
> LinkedIn linkedin.com/in/michaelbrohl
>
> Company and Management Headquarters:
> ecomify GmbH, Gustav-Winkler-Str. 22, 33699 Bielefeld, Deutschland
> Fon: +49 521 448157-90, Fax: +49 521 448157-99, www.ecomify.de
>
> Court Registration: Amtsgericht Bielefeld HRB 41683
> Chief Executive Officer: Martin Becker, Michael Brohl
>
> Am 29.01.18 um 17:21 schrieb Michael Brohl:
> > 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 release is
> > published, if I understand correctly.
> >
> > We'll have to discuss if this affects the project in terms of support
> > for the latest public Java releases. If we want to stay up-to-date
> > according to the public releases, we'll have to establish a process to
> > early check the new features and changes of a coming release and maybe
> > release more often.
> >
> > We might even have to support the latest Java release along with the
> > current LTS release to cover both users with and without commercial
> > support? I'm not sure.
> >
> > What do you think?
> >
> > Best regards,
> >
> > Michael
> >
> > [1] https://www.azul.com/java-stable-secure-free-choose-two-three/
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>