You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ofbiz.apache.org by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> on 2022/12/22 18:02:11 UTC

[OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Hi Team,

So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions about releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 (OFBIZ-12400).

To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. Daniel suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update OFBiz to handle 
strong encapsulation.

Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 year ago:

    <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first stable version during the year 2022.>>

And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, after OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using Gradle 7.6 and JDK 
17 by using temporary workarounds.

So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?

I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to run under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we need to push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's not a big deal:

-    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack done using Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
      applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
              ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
-            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
+            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
+ '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000', // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
+ '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', // OFBIZ-12721
+            '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' // OFBIZ-12726
+            ]

To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2 "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.

It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as next demos while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.

Looking forward for opinions...

Thanks

Jacques

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Le 22/12/2022 à 19:02, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
> Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 year ago:
>
>    <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first stable version during the year 2022.>> 

Mmm, this is maybe unclear. It started from this Michael's comment in OFBIZ-12400: https://s.apache.org/25s0q where he said one year ago:

    <<I'd propose to start the Java 17 compatibility work on trunk after we have created the release branch following 18.12.>>

It's of course not about releasing 22.01.01 under JDK 17, but it would much complicate things for CI and demos. Where it's all or nothing for JDK 17 
workarounds. Of course we could still run them under JDK 11, but that's much stagnation, isn't?


Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Le 25/12/2022 à 08:19, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
> Now about the demos and the BuildBot configuration, I'd like to avoid switching and renaming multiple times. 
What I suggest is to simply not run the next demo until a 23.xx branch is created

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Hi Daniel,

We indeed had releasing discussions in the past. It's not up to date, but we have a release plan page in wiki:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Release+Plan

Note that OFBIZ-12729 is not related to releasing. Releasing process is documented:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Release+Management+Guide+for+OFBiz

Your questions mostly relate to when freezing the next release branch.
Despite that I used "23.01" for the next branch to come, nothing has been decided yet.
So  the community can consider your proposition.

Now about the demos and the BuildBot configuration, I'd like to avoid switching and renaming multiple times.
Both are respectively documented at
https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-tools/tree/master/demo-backup
https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-tools/blob/master/documentation/BuildBot/BuildBot.md

All is open to discussion and amendement :)

Jacques

Le 24/12/2022 à 18:11, Daniel Watford a écrit :
> Hi Jacques,
>
> I'm not aware of ofbiz release plans, so apologies if all this has been
> discussed and determined before.
>
> Can we use trunk for demo-next rather than immediately creating a release23
> branch? If possible, I would like to see release22 run for a few months
> before we create a release23 branch for the following reasons:
> - Any non-bug fixes (i.e. improvements and new features) will normally only
> go into trunk and will therefore not reach the users until the next release
> branch is created, perhaps over a year later.
> - If we decide to accept a non-bug fix commit into release23, we will have
> to merge and test in both trunk and release23.
> - If a serious bug is found in release22, we may find we need to fix it in
> three places: trunk, release23 and release22.
>
> Assuming we have a policy of releasing every year, perhaps we can schedule
> the next release branch creation n-months after the previous release. The
> community would need to converge on a suitable value of n (somewhere
> between 0 and 12!). I would suggest 3 as a starting point.
>
> demo-next could use trunk for the first n months after a release and then
> switch to the upcoming release branch when it is created.
>
> Once again, apologies if this has already been figured out. Please could
> someone let me know.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Dan.
>
> On Sat, 24 Dec 2022 at 11:06, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have created OFBIZ-12729 for "Use JDK 17 in GitHub Action and BuildBot
>> (ie OFBiz CI) and demos"
>>
>> I expect to work on that next week. Please review and amend if necessary.
>>
>> Have a good weekend and, if you do, a merry Christmas.
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>> Le 22/12/2022 à 19:02, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
>>> Hi Team,
>>>
>>> So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions about
>> releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 (OFBIZ-12400).
>>> To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. Daniel
>> suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update OFBiz to
>> handle
>>> strong encapsulation.
>>>
>>> Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of
>> https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 year ago:
>>>     <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first stable
>> version during the year 2022.>>
>>> And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, after
>> OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using Gradle 7.6
>> and JDK
>>> 17 by using temporary workarounds.
>>>
>>> So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 version
>> under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?
>>> I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to run under
>> Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
>>> This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we need to
>> push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's not a big deal:
>>> -    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack done using
>> Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
>>>       applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
>>>               ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
>>> -            :
>> ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
>>> +            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
>>> +
>> '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000',
>> // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
>>> + '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', // OFBIZ-12721
>>> +            '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' // OFBIZ-12726
>>> +            ]
>>>
>>> To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2
>> "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.
>>> It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as next demos
>> while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.
>>> Looking forward for opinions...
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Jacques
>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Daniel Watford <da...@foomoo.co.uk>.
Hi Jacques,

I'm not aware of ofbiz release plans, so apologies if all this has been
discussed and determined before.

Can we use trunk for demo-next rather than immediately creating a release23
branch? If possible, I would like to see release22 run for a few months
before we create a release23 branch for the following reasons:
- Any non-bug fixes (i.e. improvements and new features) will normally only
go into trunk and will therefore not reach the users until the next release
branch is created, perhaps over a year later.
- If we decide to accept a non-bug fix commit into release23, we will have
to merge and test in both trunk and release23.
- If a serious bug is found in release22, we may find we need to fix it in
three places: trunk, release23 and release22.

Assuming we have a policy of releasing every year, perhaps we can schedule
the next release branch creation n-months after the previous release. The
community would need to converge on a suitable value of n (somewhere
between 0 and 12!). I would suggest 3 as a starting point.

demo-next could use trunk for the first n months after a release and then
switch to the upcoming release branch when it is created.

Once again, apologies if this has already been figured out. Please could
someone let me know.

Thanks,

Dan.

On Sat, 24 Dec 2022 at 11:06, Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I have created OFBIZ-12729 for "Use JDK 17 in GitHub Action and BuildBot
> (ie OFBiz CI) and demos"
>
> I expect to work on that next week. Please review and amend if necessary.
>
> Have a good weekend and, if you do, a merry Christmas.
>
> Jacques
>
> Le 22/12/2022 à 19:02, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
> > Hi Team,
> >
> > So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions about
> releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 (OFBIZ-12400).
> >
> > To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. Daniel
> suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update OFBiz to
> handle
> > strong encapsulation.
> >
> > Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of
> https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 year ago:
> >
> >    <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first stable
> version during the year 2022.>>
> >
> > And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, after
> OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using Gradle 7.6
> and JDK
> > 17 by using temporary workarounds.
> >
> > So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 version
> under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?
> >
> > I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to run under
> Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
> > This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we need to
> push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's not a big deal:
> >
> > -    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack done using
> Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
> >      applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
> >              ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
> > -            :
> ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
> > +            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
> > +
> '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000',
> // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
> > + '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', // OFBIZ-12721
> > +            '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' // OFBIZ-12726
> > +            ]
> >
> > To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2
> "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.
> >
> > It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as next demos
> while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.
> >
> > Looking forward for opinions...
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Jacques
>


-- 
Daniel Watford

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Hi,

I have created OFBIZ-12729 for "Use JDK 17 in GitHub Action and BuildBot (ie OFBiz CI) and demos"

I expect to work on that next week. Please review and amend if necessary.

Have a good weekend and, if you do, a merry Christmas.

Jacques

Le 22/12/2022 à 19:02, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
> Hi Team,
>
> So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions about releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 (OFBIZ-12400).
>
> To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. Daniel suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update OFBiz to handle 
> strong encapsulation.
>
> Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 year ago:
>
>    <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first stable version during the year 2022.>>
>
> And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, after OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using Gradle 7.6 and JDK 
> 17 by using temporary workarounds.
>
> So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?
>
> I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to run under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
> This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we need to push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's not a big deal:
>
> -    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack done using Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
>      applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
>              ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
> -            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
> +            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
> + '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000', // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
> + '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', // OFBIZ-12721
> +            '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' // OFBIZ-12726
> +            ]
>
> To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2 "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.
>
> It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as next demos while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.
>
> Looking forward for opinions...
>
> Thanks
>
> Jacques

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Hi Ramesh,

Please ask the user ML for such questions. See why here http://ofbiz.apache.org/mailing-lists.html.
You will get a better support. There is a wider audience there.

Thanks

This said, did you follow? (please answer on user ML)
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/OFBiz+Tutorial+-+A+Beginners+Development+Guide+for+18.12

Jacques

Le 02/01/2023 à 13:15, Ramesh Pillai a écrit :
> Hi Jac,
>
> Im new to ofbiz.
> I Want to build and customize ofbiz as per my business need.
> I had seen a lot of help videos , but I was a little bit confused.
> Can you guide me in setup project ,customise , database configure etc
> *
> *
> *Currently*
> 1. I'm using Windows 11 machine
> 2. Using intellij
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 at 17:41, Ernest Hocking <er...@computer.org> wrote:
>
>     Hi Jacques,
>
>     I;m probably too late in the piece to contribute to the decision.
>     However I'm  just starting an implementation project and have spent a
>     couple of days using v18.12.05.  I'd be keen to use v 22 and report and
>     issues encountered during the implementation/testing as there would be
>     little rework needed to load data etc into v22 at this stage
>
>     thanks and regards
>
>     Ernest
>
>
>     On Mon, Jan 2, 2023 at 5:17 PM Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>
>     wrote:
>
>     > Hi Nicolas, All,
>     >
>     > Thanks Nicolas for your opinions. I'm surprised that we are only 5 to
>     > express opinions about this important decision.
>     >
>     > Is nobody else interested ?
>     >
>     > Thanks
>     >
>     > Jacques
>     >
>     >
>     > Le 30/12/2022 à 16:04, Nicolas Malin a écrit :
>     > > Hello Jacques,
>     > >
>     > > I did the migration from my part with your suggest and I confirm that
>     > ofbiz test passed with success. I also didn't detect any problem on
>     > standard
>     > > process for ordering and invoicing during manual simulation.
>     > >
>     > > However, I didn't realize any loading test.
>     > >
>     > > So no worries from my part to move forward.
>     > >
>     > > Thanks for the works !
>     > >
>     > > Nicolas
>     > >
>     > >
>     > > On 22/12/2022 19:02, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>     > >> Hi Team,
>     > >>
>     > >> So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions about
>     > releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 (OFBIZ-12400).
>     > >>
>     > >> To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. Daniel
>     > suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update OFBiz to
>     > handle
>     > >> strong encapsulation.
>     > >>
>     > >> Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of
>     > https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 year ago:
>     > >>
>     > >>    <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first stable
>     > version during the year 2022.>>
>     > >>
>     > >> And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, after
>     > OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using Gradle 7.6
>     > and
>     > >> JDK 17 by using temporary workarounds.
>     > >>
>     > >> So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 version
>     > under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?
>     > >>
>     > >> I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to run under
>     > Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
>     > >> This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we need to
>     > push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's not a big deal:
>     > >>
>     > >> -    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack done using
>     > Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
>     > >>      applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
>     > >>              ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
>     > >> -            :
>     > ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
>     > >> +            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
>     > >> +
>     > '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000',
>     > // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
>     > >> + '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', //
>     > OFBIZ-12721
>     > >> + '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' //
>     > OFBIZ-12726
>     > >> +            ]
>     > >>
>     > >> To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2
>     > "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.
>     > >>
>     > >> It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as next
>     > demos while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.
>     > >>
>     > >> Looking forward for opinions...
>     > >>
>     > >> Thanks
>     > >>
>     > >> Jacques
>     > >>
>     >
>
>
>
> -- 
>
>
> Regards,
>
> *Ramesh Pillai **■***
>
> *Manager - IT*
>
> *M: +91 8169032006 | Email Id: **ramesh.pillai@blox.xyz* <ma...@blox.xyz>
>
>
>     05.png
>     *Website <http://blox.xyz/> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/company/blox-xyz>*
>
>     *Head Office: Method & Madness Pvt. Ltd.,****1107, Lodha Supremus, Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai - 400013**.*
>
>     Disclaimer: The information contained in this e-mail message and / or attachments to it may contain confidential or privileged information of
>     the Method & Madness Pvt. Ltd and / or its group companies. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, use, review, distribution,
>     printing or copying of the information contained in this e-mail message and / or attachments to it is strictly prohibited. If you have received
>     this communication in error, please notify us by reply e-mail or telephone and immediately delete / destroy the message and / or any attachments
>     permanently.__Warning-Computer viruses can be transmitted via e-mail. The recipient should check this e-mail and any attachment for the presence
>     of viruses. The company has taken every reasonable precaution to minimize this risk, and is not liable for any damage you may sustain as a
>     result of any virus in this e-mail. You should carry out your own virus checks before acting upon the e-mail o
>
>
> Disclaimer: The information contained in this e-mail message and / or attachments to it may contain confidential or privileged information of the 
> Method & Madness Technology Pvt. Ltd and / or its group companies. If you are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, use, review, 
> distribution, printing or copying of the information contained in this e-mail message and / or attachments to it is strictly prohibited. If you have 
> received this communication in error, please notify us by reply e-mail or telephone and immediately delete / destroy the message and / or any 
> attachments permanently.__Warning-Computer viruses can be transmitted via e-mail. The recipient should check this e-mail and any attachment for the 
> presence of viruses. The company has taken every reasonable precaution to minimize this risk, and is not liable for any damage you may sustain as a 
> result of any virus in this e-mail. You should carry out your own virus checks before acting upon the e-mail or any attachment to it.
>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Ramesh Pillai <ra...@blox.xyz>.
Hi Jac,

Im new to ofbiz.
I Want to build and customize ofbiz as per my business need.
I had seen a lot of help videos , but I was a little bit confused.
Can you guide me in setup project ,customise , database configure etc

*Currently*
1. I'm using Windows 11 machine
2. Using intellij





On Mon, 2 Jan 2023 at 17:41, Ernest Hocking <er...@computer.org>
wrote:

> Hi Jacques,
>
> I;m probably too late in the piece to contribute to the decision.
> However I'm  just starting an implementation project and have spent a
> couple of days using v18.12.05.  I'd be keen to use v 22 and report and
> issues encountered during the implementation/testing as there would be
> little rework needed to load data etc into v22 at this stage
>
> thanks and regards
>
> Ernest
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2023 at 5:17 PM Jacques Le Roux <
> jacques.le.roux@les7arts.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Nicolas, All,
> >
> > Thanks Nicolas for your opinions. I'm surprised that we are only 5 to
> > express opinions about this important decision.
> >
> > Is nobody else interested ?
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Jacques
> >
> >
> > Le 30/12/2022 à 16:04, Nicolas Malin a écrit :
> > > Hello Jacques,
> > >
> > > I did the migration from my part with your suggest and I confirm that
> > ofbiz test passed with success. I also didn't detect any problem on
> > standard
> > > process for ordering and invoicing during manual simulation.
> > >
> > > However, I didn't realize any loading test.
> > >
> > > So no worries from my part to move forward.
> > >
> > > Thanks for the works !
> > >
> > > Nicolas
> > >
> > >
> > > On 22/12/2022 19:02, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> > >> Hi Team,
> > >>
> > >> So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions about
> > releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 (OFBIZ-12400).
> > >>
> > >> To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. Daniel
> > suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update OFBiz to
> > handle
> > >> strong encapsulation.
> > >>
> > >> Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of
> > https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 year ago:
> > >>
> > >>    <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first
> stable
> > version during the year 2022.>>
> > >>
> > >> And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, after
> > OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using Gradle 7.6
> > and
> > >> JDK 17 by using temporary workarounds.
> > >>
> > >> So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 version
> > under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?
> > >>
> > >> I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to run
> under
> > Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
> > >> This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we need to
> > push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's not a big deal:
> > >>
> > >> -    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack done using
> > Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
> > >>      applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
> > >>              ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
> > >> -            :
> >
> ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
> > >> +            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
> > >> +
> >
> '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000',
> > // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
> > >> + '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', //
> > OFBIZ-12721
> > >> +            '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' //
> > OFBIZ-12726
> > >> +            ]
> > >>
> > >> To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2
> > "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.
> > >>
> > >> It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as next
> > demos while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.
> > >>
> > >> Looking forward for opinions...
> > >>
> > >> Thanks
> > >>
> > >> Jacques
> > >>
> >
>


-- 


Regards,

*Ramesh Pillai **■*

*Manager - IT*

*M: +91 8169032006 | Email Id: **ramesh.pillai@blox.xyz*
<ra...@blox.xyz>


   [image: 05.png]
   *Website <http://blox.xyz/> | LinkedIn
   <https://www.linkedin.com/company/blox-xyz>*

   *Head Office: Method & Madness Pvt. Ltd.,* *1107, Lodha Supremus,
   Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Parel, Mumbai - 400013**.*

   Disclaimer: The information contained in this e-mail message and / or
   attachments to it may contain confidential or privileged information of the
   Method & Madness Pvt. Ltd and / or its group companies. If you are not the
   intended recipient, any dissemination, use, review, distribution, printing
   or copying of the information contained in this e-mail message and / or
   attachments to it is strictly prohibited. If you have received this
   communication in error, please notify us by reply e-mail or telephone and
   immediately delete / destroy the message and / or any attachments
   permanently. Warning-Computer viruses can be transmitted via e-mail. The
   recipient should check this e-mail and any attachment for the presence of
   viruses. The company has taken every reasonable precaution to minimize this
   risk, and is not liable for any damage you may sustain as a result of any
   virus in this e-mail. You should carry out your own virus checks before
   acting upon the e-mail o

-- 


Disclaimer: The information contained in this e-mail message and / or 
attachments to it may contain confidential or privileged information of the 
Method & Madness Technology Pvt. Ltd and / or its group companies. If you 
are not the intended recipient, any dissemination, use, review, 
distribution, printing or copying of the information contained in this 
e-mail message and / or attachments to it is strictly prohibited. If you 
have received this communication in error, please notify us by reply e-mail 
or telephone and immediately delete / destroy the message and / or any 
attachments permanently.* *Warning-Computer viruses can be transmitted via 
e-mail. The recipient should check this e-mail and any attachment for the 
presence of viruses. The company has taken every reasonable precaution to 
minimize this risk, and is not liable for any damage you may sustain as a 
result of any virus in this e-mail. You should carry out your own virus 
checks before acting upon the e-mail or any attachment to it.

 

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Ernest Hocking <er...@computer.org>.
Hi Jacques,

I;m probably too late in the piece to contribute to the decision.
However I'm  just starting an implementation project and have spent a
couple of days using v18.12.05.  I'd be keen to use v 22 and report and
issues encountered during the implementation/testing as there would be
little rework needed to load data etc into v22 at this stage

thanks and regards

Ernest


On Mon, Jan 2, 2023 at 5:17 PM Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>
wrote:

> Hi Nicolas, All,
>
> Thanks Nicolas for your opinions. I'm surprised that we are only 5 to
> express opinions about this important decision.
>
> Is nobody else interested ?
>
> Thanks
>
> Jacques
>
>
> Le 30/12/2022 à 16:04, Nicolas Malin a écrit :
> > Hello Jacques,
> >
> > I did the migration from my part with your suggest and I confirm that
> ofbiz test passed with success. I also didn't detect any problem on
> standard
> > process for ordering and invoicing during manual simulation.
> >
> > However, I didn't realize any loading test.
> >
> > So no worries from my part to move forward.
> >
> > Thanks for the works !
> >
> > Nicolas
> >
> >
> > On 22/12/2022 19:02, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> >> Hi Team,
> >>
> >> So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions about
> releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 (OFBIZ-12400).
> >>
> >> To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. Daniel
> suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update OFBiz to
> handle
> >> strong encapsulation.
> >>
> >> Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of
> https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 year ago:
> >>
> >>    <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first stable
> version during the year 2022.>>
> >>
> >> And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, after
> OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using Gradle 7.6
> and
> >> JDK 17 by using temporary workarounds.
> >>
> >> So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 version
> under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?
> >>
> >> I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to run under
> Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
> >> This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we need to
> push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's not a big deal:
> >>
> >> -    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack done using
> Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
> >>      applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
> >>              ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
> >> -            :
> ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
> >> +            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
> >> +
> '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000',
> // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
> >> + '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', //
> OFBIZ-12721
> >> +            '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' //
> OFBIZ-12726
> >> +            ]
> >>
> >> To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2
> "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.
> >>
> >> It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as next
> demos while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.
> >>
> >> Looking forward for opinions...
> >>
> >> Thanks
> >>
> >> Jacques
> >>
>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by "gil.portenseigne" <gi...@nereide.fr>.
We can make a vote to validate it official.

I have no objection to start the compliance with CI since there seems to
no have opposition/restraint expressed

Gil


On 03/01/23 11:03, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> Thanks Gil!
> 
> Hi All, should we start a vote about releasing 22.01.01 under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17?
> 
> Maybe before we could run 22.01 under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 in GitHub Action, BuildBot (ie OFBiz CI) and demos as proposed by OFBIZ-12729?
> 
> We can also do both, because voting and releasing would take some time.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Jacques
> 
> Le 03/01/2023 à 09:34, gil.portenseigne a écrit :
> > Hello Jacques,
> > 
> > +1 to release with Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17, that'd be great !
> > 
> > Thanks,
> > 
> > Gil
> > On 02/01/23 11:15, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> > > Hi Nicolas, All,
> > > 
> > > Thanks Nicolas for your opinions. I'm surprised that we are only 5 to express opinions about this important decision.
> > > 
> > > Is nobody else interested ?
> > > 
> > > Thanks
> > > 
> > > Jacques
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Le 30/12/2022 à 16:04, Nicolas Malin a écrit :
> > > > Hello Jacques,
> > > > 
> > > > I did the migration from my part with your suggest and I confirm that
> > > > ofbiz test passed with success. I also didn't detect any problem on
> > > > standard process for ordering and invoicing during manual simulation.
> > > > 
> > > > However, I didn't realize any loading test.
> > > > 
> > > > So no worries from my part to move forward.
> > > > 
> > > > Thanks for the works !
> > > > 
> > > > Nicolas
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > On 22/12/2022 19:02, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> > > > > Hi Team,
> > > > > 
> > > > > So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions about releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 (OFBIZ-12400).
> > > > > 
> > > > > To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. Daniel
> > > > > suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update OFBiz
> > > > > to handle strong encapsulation.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 year ago:
> > > > > 
> > > > >     <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first stable version during the year 2022.>>
> > > > > 
> > > > > And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, after
> > > > > OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using Gradle
> > > > > 7.6 and JDK 17 by using temporary workarounds.
> > > > > 
> > > > > So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?
> > > > > 
> > > > > I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to run under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
> > > > > This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we need to push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's not a big deal:
> > > > > 
> > > > > -    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack done using Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
> > > > >       applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
> > > > >               ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
> > > > > -            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
> > > > > +            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
> > > > > + '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000', // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
> > > > > + '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', // OFBIZ-12721
> > > > > +            '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' // OFBIZ-12726
> > > > > +            ]
> > > > > 
> > > > > To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2 "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.
> > > > > 
> > > > > It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as next demos while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Looking forward for opinions...
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thanks
> > > > > 
> > > > > Jacques
> > > > > 

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Hi Gil,

I see no problems with that, we can always revert the squashed commit in case of issue. It would be even better for backporting to 23.xx later...

BTW, what about the plugins?

Thanks

Jacques

Le 24/01/2023 à 11:17, gil.portenseigne a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> One concern I have is about pushing codenarc work, should be it part of
> 23.xx branch ?
>
> I think that could be nice
>
> WDYT ?
>
> Gil
> On 24/01/23 10:03, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> Hi All,
>>
>> How many time do you think we still need before deciding to release 22.01.01 using JDK 17 and creating the 23.xx branch?
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>> Le 24/01/2023 à 09:56, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
>>> Hi Michael,
>>>
>>> It's done, but you can still amend it if you like
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>> Le 24/01/2023 à 09:50, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>>>> Hi Jacques,
>>>>
>>>> we are using Ubuntu for all our servers and I cannot confirm that.
>>>>
>>>> update-alternatives is used to generally set the envoronment to a
>>>> specific JDK through JAVA_HOME. You can still set and thus override
>>>> this environment variable in the shell session for the demo user.
>>>>
>>>> On our developer machines (Mac OS/Unix based) we use simple aliases
>>>> to change the JAVA_HOME variable to the needed JDK and can change
>>>> fluently between them.
>>>>
>>>> sudo is not required for this.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Michael
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Am 23.01.23 um 17:03 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>
>>>>> I got it to work, as often this was not as simple as expected, long story as short as possible.
>>>>>
>>>>> It was not possible to set java env vars (JAVA_HOME and PATH). Because The VM uses "Ubuntu 20.04.5 LTS".
>>>>>
>>>>> Ubuntu by default uses update-java-alternatives to handle Java versions. We had only JDK 11 so far, it's easy to add JDK 17 with "alternatives".
>>>>> Update-alternatives uses symlink to handle env vars. So setting java env vars in scripts (or even in terminal) simply does not work.
>>>>>
>>>>> So I thought that by using something like*
>>>>>
>>>>>     |update-java-alternatives -s java-versionexport JAVA_HOME=/usr/lib/jvm/|||java-version|/||export PATH=$PATH:$JAVA_HOME|
>>>>>
>>>>>     ||
>>>>>
>>>>> in scripts it would be easy to set the necessary versions.
>>>>>
>>>>> But update-java-alternatives requires to use sudo.
>>>>> And, for security reason, all demo scripts must be run with ofbizDemo user.
>>>>> Again for security reason, ofbizDemo is not a sudoer.
>>>>>
>>>>> So update-java-alternatives was not an option.
>>>>> I did not know anything about "SDKMAN!"** but it seemed to be a solution.
>>>>> Again, not as simple as expected. SDKMAN uses BASH to set env vars and Ubuntu uses DASH behind "sh".
>>>>> So few adjustments were necessary. You can see them at***
>>>>>
>>>>> * https://aboullaite.me/switching-between-java-versions-on-ubuntu-linux/
>>>>> ** https://sdkman.io/
>>>>> *** https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ofbiz-tools.git;a=commit;h=110483791d1bf640fd15e2d5589c940239c3c444
>>>>>
>>>>> Enjoy!
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>
>>>>> Le 20/01/2023 à 17:00, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
>>>>>> Hi Michael,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm sorry, somehow I missed your email. I can't give you access, that's Infra's privilege.
>>>>>> We recently had a discussion with Daniel on Slack OFBiz channel about that, here is the relevant part copy
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     <<To get SSH access to the demos VM just followhttps://infra.apache.org/vm-for-project.html#ssh-keys
>>>>>> <https://infra.apache.org/vm-for-project.html#ssh-keys>
>>>>>>     You need also to ask Infra for being a sudoer as explained athttps://infra.apache.org/vm-management.html
>>>>>> <https://infra.apache.org/vm-management.html>So first you need to ask the PMC>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As your are a PMC, I think you don't need need to ask the PMC.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought that setting different JAVA_HOME environment
>>>>>> variable values in one of the scripts would have undesirable
>>>>>> side effects on the other scripts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyway let me try your trick as it seems indeed easy.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Le 14/01/2023 à 10:10, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>>>>>>> Hi Jacques,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have no access to the server right now so I cannot see where the Java installations reside or which Linux distro we use.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Can you give me access, preferably per ssh/public key to the machine?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Ubuntu and Mac, you just install the different JDK's
>>>>>>> beside each other and point to the JDK which should be
>>>>>>> used by setting the JAVA_HOME environment variable in
>>>>>>> the start script. Easy.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Michael Brohl
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Am 13.01.23 um 18:23 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
>>>>>>>> Le 13/01/2023 à 14:15, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>>>>>>>>> set JAVA_HOME to the right JDK in the OFBiz start/stop scripts
>>>>>>>> Hi Michael,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That's a good news, how would you do that? A patch at https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-tools/tree/master/demo-backup would be welcome
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by "gil.portenseigne" <gi...@nereide.fr>.
Hi, 

One concern I have is about pushing codenarc work, should be it part of
23.xx branch ? 

I think that could be nice

WDYT ?

Gil
On 24/01/23 10:03, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> Hi All,
> 
> How many time do you think we still need before deciding to release 22.01.01 using JDK 17 and creating the 23.xx branch?
> 
> Jacques
> 
> Le 24/01/2023 à 09:56, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
> > Hi Michael,
> > 
> > It's done, but you can still amend it if you like
> > 
> > Jacques
> > 
> > Le 24/01/2023 à 09:50, Michael Brohl a écrit :
> > > Hi Jacques,
> > > 
> > > we are using Ubuntu for all our servers and I cannot confirm that.
> > > 
> > > update-alternatives is used to generally set the envoronment to a
> > > specific JDK through JAVA_HOME. You can still set and thus override
> > > this environment variable in the shell session for the demo user.
> > > 
> > > On our developer machines (Mac OS/Unix based) we use simple aliases
> > > to change the JAVA_HOME variable to the needed JDK and can change
> > > fluently between them.
> > > 
> > > sudo is not required for this.
> > > 
> > > Regards,
> > > 
> > > Michael
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Am 23.01.23 um 17:03 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
> > > > Hi,
> > > > 
> > > > I got it to work, as often this was not as simple as expected, long story as short as possible.
> > > > 
> > > > It was not possible to set java env vars (JAVA_HOME and PATH). Because The VM uses "Ubuntu 20.04.5 LTS".
> > > > 
> > > > Ubuntu by default uses update-java-alternatives to handle Java versions. We had only JDK 11 so far, it's easy to add JDK 17 with "alternatives".
> > > > Update-alternatives uses symlink to handle env vars. So setting java env vars in scripts (or even in terminal) simply does not work.
> > > > 
> > > > So I thought that by using something like*
> > > > 
> > > >    |update-java-alternatives -s java-versionexport JAVA_HOME=/usr/lib/jvm/|||java-version|/||export PATH=$PATH:$JAVA_HOME|
> > > > 
> > > >    ||
> > > > 
> > > > in scripts it would be easy to set the necessary versions.
> > > > 
> > > > But update-java-alternatives requires to use sudo.
> > > > And, for security reason, all demo scripts must be run with ofbizDemo user.
> > > > Again for security reason, ofbizDemo is not a sudoer.
> > > > 
> > > > So update-java-alternatives was not an option.
> > > > I did not know anything about "SDKMAN!"** but it seemed to be a solution.
> > > > Again, not as simple as expected. SDKMAN uses BASH to set env vars and Ubuntu uses DASH behind "sh".
> > > > So few adjustments were necessary. You can see them at***
> > > > 
> > > > * https://aboullaite.me/switching-between-java-versions-on-ubuntu-linux/
> > > > ** https://sdkman.io/
> > > > *** https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ofbiz-tools.git;a=commit;h=110483791d1bf640fd15e2d5589c940239c3c444
> > > > 
> > > > Enjoy!
> > > > 
> > > > Jacques
> > > > 
> > > > Le 20/01/2023 à 17:00, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
> > > > > Hi Michael,
> > > > > 
> > > > > I'm sorry, somehow I missed your email. I can't give you access, that's Infra's privilege.
> > > > > We recently had a discussion with Daniel on Slack OFBiz channel about that, here is the relevant part copy
> > > > > 
> > > > >    <<To get SSH access to the demos VM just followhttps://infra.apache.org/vm-for-project.html#ssh-keys
> > > > > <https://infra.apache.org/vm-for-project.html#ssh-keys>
> > > > >    You need also to ask Infra for being a sudoer as explained athttps://infra.apache.org/vm-management.html
> > > > > <https://infra.apache.org/vm-management.html>So first you need to ask the PMC>>
> > > > > 
> > > > > As your are a PMC, I think you don't need need to ask the PMC.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I thought that setting different JAVA_HOME environment
> > > > > variable values in one of the scripts would have undesirable
> > > > > side effects on the other scripts.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Anyway let me try your trick as it seems indeed easy.
> > > > > 
> > > > > Jacques
> > > > > 
> > > > > Le 14/01/2023 à 10:10, Michael Brohl a écrit :
> > > > > > Hi Jacques,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > I have no access to the server right now so I cannot see where the Java installations reside or which Linux distro we use.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Can you give me access, preferably per ssh/public key to the machine?
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > On Ubuntu and Mac, you just install the different JDK's
> > > > > > beside each other and point to the JDK which should be
> > > > > > used by setting the JAVA_HOME environment variable in
> > > > > > the start script. Easy.
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Michael Brohl
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > 
> > > > > > Am 13.01.23 um 18:23 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
> > > > > > > Le 13/01/2023 à 14:15, Michael Brohl a écrit :
> > > > > > > > set JAVA_HOME to the right JDK in the OFBiz start/stop scripts
> > > > > > > Hi Michael,
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > That's a good news, how would you do that? A patch at https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-tools/tree/master/demo-backup would be welcome
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > Jacques
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > 

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
I just restarted the demos a last time to check all is correct after the commits.

About SDKMAN, this link is useful: https://sdkman.io/usage

Jacques

Le 23/01/2023 à 17:03, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
> Hi,
>
> I got it to work, as often this was not as simple as expected, long story as short as possible.
>
> It was not possible to set java env vars (JAVA_HOME and PATH). Because The VM uses "Ubuntu 20.04.5 LTS".
>
> Ubuntu by default uses update-java-alternatives to handle Java versions. We had only JDK 11 so far, it's easy to add JDK 17 with "alternatives".
> Update-alternatives uses symlink to handle env vars. So setting java env vars in scripts (or even in terminal) simply does not work.
>
> So I thought that by using something like*
>
>    |update-java-alternatives -s java-versionexport JAVA_HOME=/usr/lib/jvm/|||java-version|/||export PATH=$PATH:$JAVA_HOME|
>
>    ||
>
> in scripts it would be easy to set the necessary versions.
>
> But update-java-alternatives requires to use sudo.
> And, for security reason, all demo scripts must be run with ofbizDemo user.
> Again for security reason, ofbizDemo is not a sudoer.
>
> So update-java-alternatives was not an option.
> I did not know anything about "SDKMAN!"** but it seemed to be a solution.
> Again, not as simple as expected. SDKMAN uses BASH to set env vars and Ubuntu uses DASH behind "sh".
> So few adjustments were necessary. You can see them at***
>
> * https://aboullaite.me/switching-between-java-versions-on-ubuntu-linux/
> ** https://sdkman.io/
> *** https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ofbiz-tools.git;a=commit;h=110483791d1bf640fd15e2d5589c940239c3c444
>
> Enjoy!
>
> Jacques
>
> Le 20/01/2023 à 17:00, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> I'm sorry, somehow I missed your email. I can't give you access, that's Infra's privilege.
>> We recently had a discussion with Daniel on Slack OFBiz channel about that, here is the relevant part copy
>>
>>    <<To get SSH access to the demos VM just followhttps://infra.apache.org/vm-for-project.html#ssh-keys
>> <https://infra.apache.org/vm-for-project.html#ssh-keys>
>>    You need also to ask Infra for being a sudoer as explained athttps://infra.apache.org/vm-management.html
>> <https://infra.apache.org/vm-management.html>So first you need to ask the PMC>>
>>
>> As your are a PMC, I think you don't need need to ask the PMC.
>>
>> I thought that setting different JAVA_HOME environment variable values in one of the scripts would have undesirable side effects on the other scripts.
>>
>> Anyway let me try your trick as it seems indeed easy.
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>> Le 14/01/2023 à 10:10, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>>> Hi Jacques,
>>>
>>> I have no access to the server right now so I cannot see where the Java installations reside or which Linux distro we use.
>>>
>>> Can you give me access, preferably per ssh/public key to the machine?
>>>
>>> On Ubuntu and Mac, you just install the different JDK's beside each other and point to the JDK which should be used by setting the JAVA_HOME 
>>> environment variable in the start script. Easy.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Michael Brohl
>>>
>>> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 13.01.23 um 18:23 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
>>>> Le 13/01/2023 à 14:15, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>>>>> set JAVA_HOME to the right JDK in the OFBiz start/stop scripts
>>>> Hi Michael,
>>>>
>>>> That's a good news, how would you do that? A patch at https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-tools/tree/master/demo-backup would be welcome
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Hi All,

How many time do you think we still need before deciding to release 22.01.01 using JDK 17 and creating the 23.xx branch?

Jacques

Le 24/01/2023 à 09:56, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
> Hi Michael,
>
> It's done, but you can still amend it if you like
>
> Jacques
>
> Le 24/01/2023 à 09:50, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>> Hi Jacques,
>>
>> we are using Ubuntu for all our servers and I cannot confirm that.
>>
>> update-alternatives is used to generally set the envoronment to a specific JDK through JAVA_HOME. You can still set and thus override this 
>> environment variable in the shell session for the demo user.
>>
>> On our developer machines (Mac OS/Unix based) we use simple aliases to change the JAVA_HOME variable to the needed JDK and can change fluently 
>> between them.
>>
>> sudo is not required for this.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> Am 23.01.23 um 17:03 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I got it to work, as often this was not as simple as expected, long story as short as possible.
>>>
>>> It was not possible to set java env vars (JAVA_HOME and PATH). Because The VM uses "Ubuntu 20.04.5 LTS".
>>>
>>> Ubuntu by default uses update-java-alternatives to handle Java versions. We had only JDK 11 so far, it's easy to add JDK 17 with "alternatives".
>>> Update-alternatives uses symlink to handle env vars. So setting java env vars in scripts (or even in terminal) simply does not work.
>>>
>>> So I thought that by using something like*
>>>
>>>    |update-java-alternatives -s java-versionexport JAVA_HOME=/usr/lib/jvm/|||java-version|/||export PATH=$PATH:$JAVA_HOME|
>>>
>>>    ||
>>>
>>> in scripts it would be easy to set the necessary versions.
>>>
>>> But update-java-alternatives requires to use sudo.
>>> And, for security reason, all demo scripts must be run with ofbizDemo user.
>>> Again for security reason, ofbizDemo is not a sudoer.
>>>
>>> So update-java-alternatives was not an option.
>>> I did not know anything about "SDKMAN!"** but it seemed to be a solution.
>>> Again, not as simple as expected. SDKMAN uses BASH to set env vars and Ubuntu uses DASH behind "sh".
>>> So few adjustments were necessary. You can see them at***
>>>
>>> * https://aboullaite.me/switching-between-java-versions-on-ubuntu-linux/
>>> ** https://sdkman.io/
>>> *** https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ofbiz-tools.git;a=commit;h=110483791d1bf640fd15e2d5589c940239c3c444
>>>
>>> Enjoy!
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>> Le 20/01/2023 à 17:00, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
>>>> Hi Michael,
>>>>
>>>> I'm sorry, somehow I missed your email. I can't give you access, that's Infra's privilege.
>>>> We recently had a discussion with Daniel on Slack OFBiz channel about that, here is the relevant part copy
>>>>
>>>>    <<To get SSH access to the demos VM just followhttps://infra.apache.org/vm-for-project.html#ssh-keys
>>>> <https://infra.apache.org/vm-for-project.html#ssh-keys>
>>>>    You need also to ask Infra for being a sudoer as explained athttps://infra.apache.org/vm-management.html
>>>> <https://infra.apache.org/vm-management.html>So first you need to ask the PMC>>
>>>>
>>>> As your are a PMC, I think you don't need need to ask the PMC.
>>>>
>>>> I thought that setting different JAVA_HOME environment variable values in one of the scripts would have undesirable side effects on the other 
>>>> scripts.
>>>>
>>>> Anyway let me try your trick as it seems indeed easy.
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>> Le 14/01/2023 à 10:10, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>>>>> Hi Jacques,
>>>>>
>>>>> I have no access to the server right now so I cannot see where the Java installations reside or which Linux distro we use.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you give me access, preferably per ssh/public key to the machine?
>>>>>
>>>>> On Ubuntu and Mac, you just install the different JDK's beside each other and point to the JDK which should be used by setting the JAVA_HOME 
>>>>> environment variable in the start script. Easy.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Michael Brohl
>>>>>
>>>>> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Am 13.01.23 um 18:23 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
>>>>>> Le 13/01/2023 à 14:15, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>>>>>>> set JAVA_HOME to the right JDK in the OFBiz start/stop scripts
>>>>>> Hi Michael,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's a good news, how would you do that? A patch at https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-tools/tree/master/demo-backup would be welcome
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>
>>>>>>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Hi Michael,

It's done, but you can still amend it if you like

Jacques

Le 24/01/2023 à 09:50, Michael Brohl a écrit :
> Hi Jacques,
>
> we are using Ubuntu for all our servers and I cannot confirm that.
>
> update-alternatives is used to generally set the envoronment to a specific JDK through JAVA_HOME. You can still set and thus override this 
> environment variable in the shell session for the demo user.
>
> On our developer machines (Mac OS/Unix based) we use simple aliases to change the JAVA_HOME variable to the needed JDK and can change fluently 
> between them.
>
> sudo is not required for this.
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael
>
>
> Am 23.01.23 um 17:03 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I got it to work, as often this was not as simple as expected, long story as short as possible.
>>
>> It was not possible to set java env vars (JAVA_HOME and PATH). Because The VM uses "Ubuntu 20.04.5 LTS".
>>
>> Ubuntu by default uses update-java-alternatives to handle Java versions. We had only JDK 11 so far, it's easy to add JDK 17 with "alternatives".
>> Update-alternatives uses symlink to handle env vars. So setting java env vars in scripts (or even in terminal) simply does not work.
>>
>> So I thought that by using something like*
>>
>>    |update-java-alternatives -s java-versionexport JAVA_HOME=/usr/lib/jvm/|||java-version|/||export PATH=$PATH:$JAVA_HOME|
>>
>>    ||
>>
>> in scripts it would be easy to set the necessary versions.
>>
>> But update-java-alternatives requires to use sudo.
>> And, for security reason, all demo scripts must be run with ofbizDemo user.
>> Again for security reason, ofbizDemo is not a sudoer.
>>
>> So update-java-alternatives was not an option.
>> I did not know anything about "SDKMAN!"** but it seemed to be a solution.
>> Again, not as simple as expected. SDKMAN uses BASH to set env vars and Ubuntu uses DASH behind "sh".
>> So few adjustments were necessary. You can see them at***
>>
>> * https://aboullaite.me/switching-between-java-versions-on-ubuntu-linux/
>> ** https://sdkman.io/
>> *** https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ofbiz-tools.git;a=commit;h=110483791d1bf640fd15e2d5589c940239c3c444
>>
>> Enjoy!
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>> Le 20/01/2023 à 17:00, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
>>> Hi Michael,
>>>
>>> I'm sorry, somehow I missed your email. I can't give you access, that's Infra's privilege.
>>> We recently had a discussion with Daniel on Slack OFBiz channel about that, here is the relevant part copy
>>>
>>>    <<To get SSH access to the demos VM just followhttps://infra.apache.org/vm-for-project.html#ssh-keys
>>> <https://infra.apache.org/vm-for-project.html#ssh-keys>
>>>    You need also to ask Infra for being a sudoer as explained athttps://infra.apache.org/vm-management.html
>>> <https://infra.apache.org/vm-management.html>So first you need to ask the PMC>>
>>>
>>> As your are a PMC, I think you don't need need to ask the PMC.
>>>
>>> I thought that setting different JAVA_HOME environment variable values in one of the scripts would have undesirable side effects on the other 
>>> scripts.
>>>
>>> Anyway let me try your trick as it seems indeed easy.
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>> Le 14/01/2023 à 10:10, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>>>> Hi Jacques,
>>>>
>>>> I have no access to the server right now so I cannot see where the Java installations reside or which Linux distro we use.
>>>>
>>>> Can you give me access, preferably per ssh/public key to the machine?
>>>>
>>>> On Ubuntu and Mac, you just install the different JDK's beside each other and point to the JDK which should be used by setting the JAVA_HOME 
>>>> environment variable in the start script. Easy.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Michael Brohl
>>>>
>>>> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Am 13.01.23 um 18:23 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
>>>>> Le 13/01/2023 à 14:15, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>>>>>> set JAVA_HOME to the right JDK in the OFBiz start/stop scripts
>>>>> Hi Michael,
>>>>>
>>>>> That's a good news, how would you do that? A patch at https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-tools/tree/master/demo-backup would be welcome
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>
>>>>>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de>.
Hi Jacques,

we are using Ubuntu for all our servers and I cannot confirm that.

update-alternatives is used to generally set the envoronment to a  
specific JDK through JAVA_HOME. You can still set and thus override this 
environment variable in the shell session for the demo user.

On our developer machines (Mac OS/Unix based) we use simple aliases to 
change the JAVA_HOME variable to the needed JDK and can change fluently 
between them.

sudo is not required for this.

Regards,

Michael


Am 23.01.23 um 17:03 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
> Hi,
>
> I got it to work, as often this was not as simple as expected, long 
> story as short as possible.
>
> It was not possible to set java env vars (JAVA_HOME and PATH). Because 
> The VM uses "Ubuntu 20.04.5 LTS".
>
> Ubuntu by default uses update-java-alternatives to handle Java 
> versions. We had only JDK 11 so far, it's easy to add JDK 17 with 
> "alternatives".
> Update-alternatives uses symlink to handle env vars. So setting java 
> env vars in scripts (or even in terminal) simply does not work.
>
> So I thought that by using something like*
>
>    |update-java-alternatives -s java-versionexport 
> JAVA_HOME=/usr/lib/jvm/|||java-version|/||export PATH=$PATH:$JAVA_HOME|
>
>    ||
>
> in scripts it would be easy to set the necessary versions.
>
> But update-java-alternatives requires to use sudo.
> And, for security reason, all demo scripts must be run with ofbizDemo 
> user.
> Again for security reason, ofbizDemo is not a sudoer.
>
> So update-java-alternatives was not an option.
> I did not know anything about "SDKMAN!"** but it seemed to be a solution.
> Again, not as simple as expected. SDKMAN uses BASH to set env vars and 
> Ubuntu uses DASH behind "sh".
> So few adjustments were necessary. You can see them at***
>
> * https://aboullaite.me/switching-between-java-versions-on-ubuntu-linux/
> ** https://sdkman.io/
> *** 
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ofbiz-tools.git;a=commit;h=110483791d1bf640fd15e2d5589c940239c3c444
>
> Enjoy!
>
> Jacques
>
> Le 20/01/2023 à 17:00, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> I'm sorry, somehow I missed your email. I can't give you access, 
>> that's Infra's privilege.
>> We recently had a discussion with Daniel on Slack OFBiz channel about 
>> that, here is the relevant part copy
>>
>>    <<To get SSH access to the demos VM just 
>> followhttps://infra.apache.org/vm-for-project.html#ssh-keys
>> <https://infra.apache.org/vm-for-project.html#ssh-keys>
>>    You need also to ask Infra for being a sudoer as explained 
>> athttps://infra.apache.org/vm-management.html
>> <https://infra.apache.org/vm-management.html>So first you need to ask 
>> the PMC>>
>>
>> As your are a PMC, I think you don't need need to ask the PMC.
>>
>> I thought that setting different JAVA_HOME environment variable 
>> values in one of the scripts would have undesirable side effects on 
>> the other scripts.
>>
>> Anyway let me try your trick as it seems indeed easy.
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>> Le 14/01/2023 à 10:10, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>>> Hi Jacques,
>>>
>>> I have no access to the server right now so I cannot see where the 
>>> Java installations reside or which Linux distro we use.
>>>
>>> Can you give me access, preferably per ssh/public key to the machine?
>>>
>>> On Ubuntu and Mac, you just install the different JDK's beside each 
>>> other and point to the JDK which should be used by setting the 
>>> JAVA_HOME environment variable in the start script. Easy.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Michael Brohl
>>>
>>> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 13.01.23 um 18:23 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
>>>> Le 13/01/2023 à 14:15, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>>>>> set JAVA_HOME to the right JDK in the OFBiz start/stop scripts
>>>> Hi Michael,
>>>>
>>>> That's a good news, how would you do that? A patch at 
>>>> https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-tools/tree/master/demo-backup would 
>>>> be welcome
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Hi,

I got it to work, as often this was not as simple as expected, long story as short as possible.

It was not possible to set java env vars (JAVA_HOME and PATH). Because The VM uses "Ubuntu 20.04.5 LTS".

Ubuntu by default uses update-java-alternatives to handle Java versions. We had only JDK 11 so far, it's easy to add JDK 17 with "alternatives".
Update-alternatives uses symlink to handle env vars. So setting java env vars in scripts (or even in terminal) simply does not work.

So I thought that by using something like*

    |update-java-alternatives -s java-versionexport JAVA_HOME=/usr/lib/jvm/|||java-version|/||export PATH=$PATH:$JAVA_HOME|

    ||

in scripts it would be easy to set the necessary versions.

But update-java-alternatives requires to use sudo.
And, for security reason, all demo scripts must be run with ofbizDemo user.
Again for security reason, ofbizDemo is not a sudoer.

So update-java-alternatives was not an option.
I did not know anything about "SDKMAN!"** but it seemed to be a solution.
Again, not as simple as expected. SDKMAN uses BASH to set env vars and Ubuntu uses DASH behind "sh".
So few adjustments were necessary. You can see them at***

* https://aboullaite.me/switching-between-java-versions-on-ubuntu-linux/
** https://sdkman.io/
*** https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=ofbiz-tools.git;a=commit;h=110483791d1bf640fd15e2d5589c940239c3c444

Enjoy!

Jacques

Le 20/01/2023 à 17:00, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
> Hi Michael,
>
> I'm sorry, somehow I missed your email. I can't give you access, that's Infra's privilege.
> We recently had a discussion with Daniel on Slack OFBiz channel about that, here is the relevant part copy
>
>    <<To get SSH access to the demos VM just followhttps://infra.apache.org/vm-for-project.html#ssh-keys
> <https://infra.apache.org/vm-for-project.html#ssh-keys>
>    You need also to ask Infra for being a sudoer as explained athttps://infra.apache.org/vm-management.html
> <https://infra.apache.org/vm-management.html>So first you need to ask the PMC>>
>
> As your are a PMC, I think you don't need need to ask the PMC.
>
> I thought that setting different JAVA_HOME environment variable values in one of the scripts would have undesirable side effects on the other scripts.
>
> Anyway let me try your trick as it seems indeed easy.
>
> Jacques
>
> Le 14/01/2023 à 10:10, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>> Hi Jacques,
>>
>> I have no access to the server right now so I cannot see where the Java installations reside or which Linux distro we use.
>>
>> Can you give me access, preferably per ssh/public key to the machine?
>>
>> On Ubuntu and Mac, you just install the different JDK's beside each other and point to the JDK which should be used by setting the JAVA_HOME 
>> environment variable in the start script. Easy.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Michael Brohl
>>
>> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
>>
>>
>> Am 13.01.23 um 18:23 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
>>> Le 13/01/2023 à 14:15, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>>>> set JAVA_HOME to the right JDK in the OFBiz start/stop scripts
>>> Hi Michael,
>>>
>>> That's a good news, how would you do that? A patch at https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-tools/tree/master/demo-backup would be welcome
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Hi Michael,

I'm sorry, somehow I missed your email. I can't give you access, that's Infra's privilege.
We recently had a discussion with Daniel on Slack OFBiz channel about that, here is the relevant part copy

    <<To get SSH access to the demos VM just followhttps://infra.apache.org/vm-for-project.html#ssh-keys
    <https://infra.apache.org/vm-for-project.html#ssh-keys>
    You need also to ask Infra for being a sudoer as explained athttps://infra.apache.org/vm-management.html
    <https://infra.apache.org/vm-management.html>So first you need to ask the PMC>>

As your are a PMC, I think you don't need need to ask the PMC.

I thought that setting different JAVA_HOME environment variable values in one of the scripts would have undesirable side effects on the other scripts.

Anyway let me try your trick as it seems indeed easy.

Jacques

Le 14/01/2023 à 10:10, Michael Brohl a écrit :
> Hi Jacques,
>
> I have no access to the server right now so I cannot see where the Java installations reside or which Linux distro we use.
>
> Can you give me access, preferably per ssh/public key to the machine?
>
> On Ubuntu and Mac, you just install the different JDK's beside each other and point to the JDK which should be used by setting the JAVA_HOME 
> environment variable in the start script. Easy.
>
> Regards,
>
> Michael Brohl
>
> ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de
>
>
> Am 13.01.23 um 18:23 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
>> Le 13/01/2023 à 14:15, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>>> set JAVA_HOME to the right JDK in the OFBiz start/stop scripts
>> Hi Michael,
>>
>> That's a good news, how would you do that? A patch at https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-tools/tree/master/demo-backup would be welcome
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de>.
Hi Jacques,

I have no access to the server right now so I cannot see where the Java 
installations reside or which Linux distro we use.

Can you give me access, preferably per ssh/public key to the machine?

On Ubuntu and Mac, you just install the different JDK's beside each 
other and point to the JDK which should be used by setting the JAVA_HOME 
environment variable in the start script. Easy.

Regards,

Michael Brohl

ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de


Am 13.01.23 um 18:23 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
> Le 13/01/2023 à 14:15, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>> set JAVA_HOME to the right JDK in the OFBiz start/stop scripts
> Hi Michael,
>
> That's a good news, how would you do that? A patch at 
> https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-tools/tree/master/demo-backup would be 
> welcome
>
> Thanks
>
> Jacques
>
>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Le 13/01/2023 à 14:15, Michael Brohl a écrit :
> set JAVA_HOME to the right JDK in the OFBiz start/stop scripts
Hi Michael,

That's a good news, how would you do that? A patch at https://github.com/apache/ofbiz-tools/tree/master/demo-backup would be welcome

Thanks

Jacques



Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de>.
Hi Jacques,

where is the problem to run the demos using different JDK's?

I know it is possible to have different JDK's installed on Linux based 
Systems and set JAVA_HOME to the right JDK in the OFBiz start/stop scripts.

Best regards,

Michael Brohl

ecomify GmbH - www.ecomify.de


Am 13.01.23 um 08:44 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
> Hi,
>
> All works and is ready here but the demos which are still under JDK 
> 11. If nobody disagree, as a temporary solution, I propose to stop the 
> current stable (18.12) to allow next (22.01) and trunk to run under 
> JDK 17
>
> Opinions?
>
> TIA
>
> Jacques
>
> Le 10/01/2023 à 16:48, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
>> Michael, All,
>>
>> I answered in the Jira. I think we are ready now for the next step: 
>> CI...
>>
>> Le 10/01/2023 à 08:18, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>>> Judging from the issues in 
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12400 it doesn't seem 
>>> that we are ready for a release yet.
>>>
>>> To bring this to attention for a wieder audience here: @Jacques: why 
>>> is it necessary to make use of release candidate distributions of 
>>> Gradle instead of stable ones?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 03.01.23 um 14:26 schrieb Michael Brohl:
>>>> I would recommend having it running some time on buildbot and the 
>>>> demos for field testing before we do a release.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Michael
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Am 03.01.23 um 11:03 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
>>>>> Thanks Gil!
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi All, should we start a vote about releasing 22.01.01 under 
>>>>> Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17?
>>>>>
>>>>> Maybe before we could run 22.01 under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 in 
>>>>> GitHub Action, BuildBot (ie OFBiz CI) and demos as proposed by 
>>>>> OFBIZ-12729?
>>>>>
>>>>> We can also do both, because voting and releasing would take some 
>>>>> time.
>>>>>
>>>>> What do you think?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>
>>>>> Le 03/01/2023 à 09:34, gil.portenseigne a écrit :
>>>>>> Hello Jacques,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> +1 to release with Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17, that'd be great !
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Gil
>>>>>> On 02/01/23 11:15, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Nicolas, All,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks Nicolas for your opinions. I'm surprised that we are only 
>>>>>>> 5 to express opinions about this important decision.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Is nobody else interested ?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Le 30/12/2022 à 16:04, Nicolas Malin a écrit :
>>>>>>>> Hello Jacques,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I did the migration from my part with your suggest and I 
>>>>>>>> confirm that
>>>>>>>> ofbiz test passed with success. I also didn't detect any 
>>>>>>>> problem on
>>>>>>>> standard process for ordering and invoicing during manual 
>>>>>>>> simulation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> However, I didn't realize any loading test.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So no worries from my part to move forward.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks for the works !
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nicolas
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 22/12/2022 19:02, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi Team,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions 
>>>>>>>>> about releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 
>>>>>>>>> 17 (OFBIZ-12400).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. 
>>>>>>>>> Daniel
>>>>>>>>> suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update 
>>>>>>>>> OFBiz
>>>>>>>>> to handle strong encapsulation.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of 
>>>>>>>>> https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 
>>>>>>>>> year ago:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>     <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a 
>>>>>>>>> first stable version during the year 2022.>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, 
>>>>>>>>> after
>>>>>>>>> OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using 
>>>>>>>>> Gradle
>>>>>>>>> 7.6 and JDK 17 by using temporary workarounds.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 
>>>>>>>>> version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to 
>>>>>>>>> run under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
>>>>>>>>> This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we 
>>>>>>>>> need to push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's 
>>>>>>>>> not a big deal:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> -    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack 
>>>>>>>>> done using Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
>>>>>>>>>       applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
>>>>>>>>>               ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
>>>>>>>>> -            : 
>>>>>>>>> ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
>>>>>>>>> +            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
>>>>>>>>> + 
>>>>>>>>> '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000', 
>>>>>>>>> // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
>>>>>>>>> + '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', // 
>>>>>>>>> OFBIZ-12721
>>>>>>>>> + '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' // OFBIZ-12726
>>>>>>>>> +            ]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2 
>>>>>>>>> "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as 
>>>>>>>>> next demos while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Looking forward for opinions...
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>>>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Hi,

All works and is ready here but the demos which are still under JDK 11. If nobody disagree, as a temporary solution, I propose to stop the current 
stable (18.12) to allow next (22.01) and trunk to run under JDK 17

Opinions?

TIA

Jacques

Le 10/01/2023 à 16:48, Jacques Le Roux a écrit :
> Michael, All,
>
> I answered in the Jira. I think we are ready now for the next step: CI...
>
> Le 10/01/2023 à 08:18, Michael Brohl a écrit :
>> Judging from the issues in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12400 it doesn't seem that we are ready for a release yet.
>>
>> To bring this to attention for a wieder audience here: @Jacques: why is it necessary to make use of release candidate distributions of Gradle 
>> instead of stable ones?
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> Am 03.01.23 um 14:26 schrieb Michael Brohl:
>>> I would recommend having it running some time on buildbot and the demos for field testing before we do a release.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Michael
>>>
>>>
>>> Am 03.01.23 um 11:03 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
>>>> Thanks Gil!
>>>>
>>>> Hi All, should we start a vote about releasing 22.01.01 under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17?
>>>>
>>>> Maybe before we could run 22.01 under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 in GitHub Action, BuildBot (ie OFBiz CI) and demos as proposed by OFBIZ-12729?
>>>>
>>>> We can also do both, because voting and releasing would take some time.
>>>>
>>>> What do you think?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>> Le 03/01/2023 à 09:34, gil.portenseigne a écrit :
>>>>> Hello Jacques,
>>>>>
>>>>> +1 to release with Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17, that'd be great !
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>
>>>>> Gil
>>>>> On 02/01/23 11:15, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Nicolas, All,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks Nicolas for your opinions. I'm surprised that we are only 5 to express opinions about this important decision.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Is nobody else interested ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Le 30/12/2022 à 16:04, Nicolas Malin a écrit :
>>>>>>> Hello Jacques,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I did the migration from my part with your suggest and I confirm that
>>>>>>> ofbiz test passed with success. I also didn't detect any problem on
>>>>>>> standard process for ordering and invoicing during manual simulation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> However, I didn't realize any loading test.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So no worries from my part to move forward.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for the works !
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nicolas
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 22/12/2022 19:02, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Team,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions about releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 (OFBIZ-12400).
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. Daniel
>>>>>>>> suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update OFBiz
>>>>>>>> to handle strong encapsulation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 year ago:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>     <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first stable version during the year 2022.>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, after
>>>>>>>> OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using Gradle
>>>>>>>> 7.6 and JDK 17 by using temporary workarounds.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to run under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
>>>>>>>> This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we need to push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's not a big deal:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack done using Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
>>>>>>>>       applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
>>>>>>>>               ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
>>>>>>>> -            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
>>>>>>>> +            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
>>>>>>>> + '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000', // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
>>>>>>>> + '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', // OFBIZ-12721
>>>>>>>> + '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' // OFBIZ-12726
>>>>>>>> +            ]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2 "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as next demos while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Looking forward for opinions...
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Michael, All,

I answered in the Jira. I think we are ready now for the next step: CI...

Le 10/01/2023 à 08:18, Michael Brohl a écrit :
> Judging from the issues in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12400 it doesn't seem that we are ready for a release yet.
>
> To bring this to attention for a wieder audience here: @Jacques: why is it necessary to make use of release candidate distributions of Gradle 
> instead of stable ones?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Michael
>
>
> Am 03.01.23 um 14:26 schrieb Michael Brohl:
>> I would recommend having it running some time on buildbot and the demos for field testing before we do a release.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Michael
>>
>>
>> Am 03.01.23 um 11:03 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
>>> Thanks Gil!
>>>
>>> Hi All, should we start a vote about releasing 22.01.01 under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17?
>>>
>>> Maybe before we could run 22.01 under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 in GitHub Action, BuildBot (ie OFBiz CI) and demos as proposed by OFBIZ-12729?
>>>
>>> We can also do both, because voting and releasing would take some time.
>>>
>>> What do you think?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>> Le 03/01/2023 à 09:34, gil.portenseigne a écrit :
>>>> Hello Jacques,
>>>>
>>>> +1 to release with Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17, that'd be great !
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>
>>>> Gil
>>>> On 02/01/23 11:15, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>> Hi Nicolas, All,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks Nicolas for your opinions. I'm surprised that we are only 5 to express opinions about this important decision.
>>>>>
>>>>> Is nobody else interested ?
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Le 30/12/2022 à 16:04, Nicolas Malin a écrit :
>>>>>> Hello Jacques,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I did the migration from my part with your suggest and I confirm that
>>>>>> ofbiz test passed with success. I also didn't detect any problem on
>>>>>> standard process for ordering and invoicing during manual simulation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> However, I didn't realize any loading test.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So no worries from my part to move forward.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for the works !
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nicolas
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 22/12/2022 19:02, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>>> Hi Team,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions about releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 (OFBIZ-12400).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. Daniel
>>>>>>> suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update OFBiz
>>>>>>> to handle strong encapsulation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 year ago:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>     <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first stable version during the year 2022.>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, after
>>>>>>> OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using Gradle
>>>>>>> 7.6 and JDK 17 by using temporary workarounds.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to run under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
>>>>>>> This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we need to push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's not a big deal:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack done using Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
>>>>>>>       applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
>>>>>>>               ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
>>>>>>> -            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
>>>>>>> +            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
>>>>>>> + '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000', // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
>>>>>>> + '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', // OFBIZ-12721
>>>>>>> + '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' // OFBIZ-12726
>>>>>>> +            ]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2 "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as next demos while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Looking forward for opinions...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de>.
Judging from the issues in 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-12400 it doesn't seem that 
we are ready for a release yet.

To bring this to attention for a wieder audience here: @Jacques: why is 
it necessary to make use of release candidate distributions of Gradle 
instead of stable ones?

Best regards,

Michael


Am 03.01.23 um 14:26 schrieb Michael Brohl:
> I would recommend having it running some time on buildbot and the 
> demos for field testing before we do a release.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Michael
>
>
> Am 03.01.23 um 11:03 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
>> Thanks Gil!
>>
>> Hi All, should we start a vote about releasing 22.01.01 under Gradle 
>> 7.6 and JDK 17?
>>
>> Maybe before we could run 22.01 under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 in GitHub 
>> Action, BuildBot (ie OFBiz CI) and demos as proposed by OFBIZ-12729?
>>
>> We can also do both, because voting and releasing would take some time.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>> Le 03/01/2023 à 09:34, gil.portenseigne a écrit :
>>> Hello Jacques,
>>>
>>> +1 to release with Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17, that'd be great !
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Gil
>>> On 02/01/23 11:15, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>> Hi Nicolas, All,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks Nicolas for your opinions. I'm surprised that we are only 5 
>>>> to express opinions about this important decision.
>>>>
>>>> Is nobody else interested ?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Le 30/12/2022 à 16:04, Nicolas Malin a écrit :
>>>>> Hello Jacques,
>>>>>
>>>>> I did the migration from my part with your suggest and I confirm that
>>>>> ofbiz test passed with success. I also didn't detect any problem on
>>>>> standard process for ordering and invoicing during manual simulation.
>>>>>
>>>>> However, I didn't realize any loading test.
>>>>>
>>>>> So no worries from my part to move forward.
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for the works !
>>>>>
>>>>> Nicolas
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 22/12/2022 19:02, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>>> Hi Team,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions 
>>>>>> about releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 
>>>>>> (OFBIZ-12400).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. Daniel
>>>>>> suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update OFBiz
>>>>>> to handle strong encapsulation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of 
>>>>>> https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 
>>>>>> year ago:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>     <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first 
>>>>>> stable version during the year 2022.>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, after
>>>>>> OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using Gradle
>>>>>> 7.6 and JDK 17 by using temporary workarounds.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 
>>>>>> version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to run 
>>>>>> under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
>>>>>> This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we 
>>>>>> need to push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's not 
>>>>>> a big deal:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack done 
>>>>>> using Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
>>>>>>       applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
>>>>>>               ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
>>>>>> -            : 
>>>>>> ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
>>>>>> +            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
>>>>>> + 
>>>>>> '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000', 
>>>>>> // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
>>>>>> + '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', // 
>>>>>> OFBIZ-12721
>>>>>> + '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' // OFBIZ-12726
>>>>>> +            ]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2 
>>>>>> "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as 
>>>>>> next demos while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Looking forward for opinions...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de>.
I would recommend having it running some time on buildbot and the demos 
for field testing before we do a release.

Thanks,

Michael


Am 03.01.23 um 11:03 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
> Thanks Gil!
>
> Hi All, should we start a vote about releasing 22.01.01 under Gradle 
> 7.6 and JDK 17?
>
> Maybe before we could run 22.01 under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 in GitHub 
> Action, BuildBot (ie OFBiz CI) and demos as proposed by OFBIZ-12729?
>
> We can also do both, because voting and releasing would take some time.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Thanks
>
> Jacques
>
> Le 03/01/2023 à 09:34, gil.portenseigne a écrit :
>> Hello Jacques,
>>
>> +1 to release with Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17, that'd be great !
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Gil
>> On 02/01/23 11:15, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>> Hi Nicolas, All,
>>>
>>> Thanks Nicolas for your opinions. I'm surprised that we are only 5 
>>> to express opinions about this important decision.
>>>
>>> Is nobody else interested ?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>>
>>> Jacques
>>>
>>>
>>> Le 30/12/2022 à 16:04, Nicolas Malin a écrit :
>>>> Hello Jacques,
>>>>
>>>> I did the migration from my part with your suggest and I confirm that
>>>> ofbiz test passed with success. I also didn't detect any problem on
>>>> standard process for ordering and invoicing during manual simulation.
>>>>
>>>> However, I didn't realize any loading test.
>>>>
>>>> So no worries from my part to move forward.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the works !
>>>>
>>>> Nicolas
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 22/12/2022 19:02, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>>> Hi Team,
>>>>>
>>>>> So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions 
>>>>> about releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 
>>>>> (OFBIZ-12400).
>>>>>
>>>>> To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. Daniel
>>>>> suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update OFBiz
>>>>> to handle strong encapsulation.
>>>>>
>>>>> Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of 
>>>>> https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 
>>>>> year ago:
>>>>>
>>>>>     <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first 
>>>>> stable version during the year 2022.>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, after
>>>>> OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using Gradle
>>>>> 7.6 and JDK 17 by using temporary workarounds.
>>>>>
>>>>> So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 
>>>>> version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?
>>>>>
>>>>> I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to run 
>>>>> under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
>>>>> This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we 
>>>>> need to push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's not a 
>>>>> big deal:
>>>>>
>>>>> -    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack done 
>>>>> using Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
>>>>>       applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
>>>>>               ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
>>>>> -            : 
>>>>> ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
>>>>> +            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
>>>>> + 
>>>>> '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000', 
>>>>> // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
>>>>> + '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', // 
>>>>> OFBIZ-12721
>>>>> +            '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' // 
>>>>> OFBIZ-12726
>>>>> +            ]
>>>>>
>>>>> To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2 
>>>>> "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.
>>>>>
>>>>> It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as next 
>>>>> demos while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.
>>>>>
>>>>> Looking forward for opinions...
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>
>>>>> Jacques
>>>>>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Thanks Gil!

Hi All, should we start a vote about releasing 22.01.01 under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17?

Maybe before we could run 22.01 under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 in GitHub Action, BuildBot (ie OFBiz CI) and demos as proposed by OFBIZ-12729?

We can also do both, because voting and releasing would take some time.

What do you think?

Thanks

Jacques

Le 03/01/2023 à 09:34, gil.portenseigne a écrit :
> Hello Jacques,
>
> +1 to release with Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17, that'd be great !
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gil
> On 02/01/23 11:15, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> Hi Nicolas, All,
>>
>> Thanks Nicolas for your opinions. I'm surprised that we are only 5 to express opinions about this important decision.
>>
>> Is nobody else interested ?
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>
>> Le 30/12/2022 à 16:04, Nicolas Malin a écrit :
>>> Hello Jacques,
>>>
>>> I did the migration from my part with your suggest and I confirm that
>>> ofbiz test passed with success. I also didn't detect any problem on
>>> standard process for ordering and invoicing during manual simulation.
>>>
>>> However, I didn't realize any loading test.
>>>
>>> So no worries from my part to move forward.
>>>
>>> Thanks for the works !
>>>
>>> Nicolas
>>>
>>>
>>> On 22/12/2022 19:02, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>>> Hi Team,
>>>>
>>>> So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions about releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 (OFBIZ-12400).
>>>>
>>>> To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. Daniel
>>>> suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update OFBiz
>>>> to handle strong encapsulation.
>>>>
>>>> Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 year ago:
>>>>
>>>>     <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first stable version during the year 2022.>>
>>>>
>>>> And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, after
>>>> OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using Gradle
>>>> 7.6 and JDK 17 by using temporary workarounds.
>>>>
>>>> So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?
>>>>
>>>> I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to run under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
>>>> This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we need to push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's not a big deal:
>>>>
>>>> -    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack done using Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
>>>>       applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
>>>>               ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
>>>> -            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
>>>> +            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
>>>> + '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000', // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
>>>> + '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', // OFBIZ-12721
>>>> +            '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' // OFBIZ-12726
>>>> +            ]
>>>>
>>>> To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2 "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.
>>>>
>>>> It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as next demos while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.
>>>>
>>>> Looking forward for opinions...
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>>
>>>> Jacques
>>>>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by "gil.portenseigne" <gi...@nereide.fr>.
Hello Jacques,

+1 to release with Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17, that'd be great !

Thanks,

Gil
On 02/01/23 11:15, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> Hi Nicolas, All,
> 
> Thanks Nicolas for your opinions. I'm surprised that we are only 5 to express opinions about this important decision.
> 
> Is nobody else interested ?
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Jacques
> 
> 
> Le 30/12/2022 à 16:04, Nicolas Malin a écrit :
> > Hello Jacques,
> > 
> > I did the migration from my part with your suggest and I confirm that
> > ofbiz test passed with success. I also didn't detect any problem on
> > standard process for ordering and invoicing during manual simulation.
> > 
> > However, I didn't realize any loading test.
> > 
> > So no worries from my part to move forward.
> > 
> > Thanks for the works !
> > 
> > Nicolas
> > 
> > 
> > On 22/12/2022 19:02, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> > > Hi Team,
> > > 
> > > So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions about releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 (OFBIZ-12400).
> > > 
> > > To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. Daniel
> > > suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update OFBiz
> > > to handle strong encapsulation.
> > > 
> > > Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 year ago:
> > > 
> > >    <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first stable version during the year 2022.>>
> > > 
> > > And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, after
> > > OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using Gradle
> > > 7.6 and JDK 17 by using temporary workarounds.
> > > 
> > > So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?
> > > 
> > > I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to run under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
> > > This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we need to push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's not a big deal:
> > > 
> > > -    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack done using Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
> > >      applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
> > >              ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
> > > -            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
> > > +            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
> > > + '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000', // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
> > > + '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', // OFBIZ-12721
> > > +            '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' // OFBIZ-12726
> > > +            ]
> > > 
> > > To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2 "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.
> > > 
> > > It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as next demos while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.
> > > 
> > > Looking forward for opinions...
> > > 
> > > Thanks
> > > 
> > > Jacques
> > > 

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Hi Nicolas, All,

Thanks Nicolas for your opinions. I'm surprised that we are only 5 to express opinions about this important decision.

Is nobody else interested ?

Thanks

Jacques


Le 30/12/2022 à 16:04, Nicolas Malin a écrit :
> Hello Jacques,
>
> I did the migration from my part with your suggest and I confirm that ofbiz test passed with success. I also didn't detect any problem on standard 
> process for ordering and invoicing during manual simulation.
>
> However, I didn't realize any loading test.
>
> So no worries from my part to move forward.
>
> Thanks for the works !
>
> Nicolas
>
>
> On 22/12/2022 19:02, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> Hi Team,
>>
>> So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions about releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 (OFBIZ-12400).
>>
>> To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. Daniel suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update OFBiz to handle 
>> strong encapsulation.
>>
>> Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 year ago:
>>
>>    <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first stable version during the year 2022.>>
>>
>> And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, after OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using Gradle 7.6 and 
>> JDK 17 by using temporary workarounds.
>>
>> So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?
>>
>> I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to run under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
>> This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we need to push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's not a big deal:
>>
>> -    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack done using Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
>>      applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
>>              ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
>> -            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
>> +            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
>> + '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000', // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
>> + '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', // OFBIZ-12721
>> +            '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' // OFBIZ-12726
>> +            ]
>>
>> To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2 "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.
>>
>> It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as next demos while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.
>>
>> Looking forward for opinions...
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Jacques
>>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Nicolas Malin <ni...@nereide.fr>.
Hello Jacques,

I did the migration from my part with your suggest and I confirm that 
ofbiz test passed with success. I also didn't detect any problem on 
standard process for ordering and invoicing during manual simulation.

However, I didn't realize any loading test.

So no worries from my part to move forward.

Thanks for the works !

Nicolas


On 22/12/2022 19:02, Jacques Le Roux wrote:
> Hi Team,
>
> So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions about 
> releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 (OFBIZ-12400).
>
> To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. Daniel 
> suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update OFBiz to 
> handle strong encapsulation.
>
> Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of 
> https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 year ago:
>
>    <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first 
> stable version during the year 2022.>>
>
> And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, after 
> OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using Gradle 
> 7.6 and JDK 17 by using temporary workarounds.
>
> So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 version 
> under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?
>
> I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to run 
> under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
> This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we need to 
> push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's not a big deal:
>
> -    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack done using 
> Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
>      applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
>              ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
> -            : 
> ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
> +            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
> + 
> '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000', 
> // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
> + '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', // OFBIZ-12721
> +            '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' // OFBIZ-12726
> +            ]
>
> To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2 
> "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.
>
> It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as next 
> demos while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.
>
> Looking forward for opinions...
>
> Thanks
>
> Jacques
>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Hi Michael,

Thank you to clarify.

So we need now to define when. I don't think we need to wait too long. The 1st step would be to run the CI (ie GH and Buildbot) and the demos under 
JDK 17 (=> Gradle 7.6)

When should we do that? We need more opinions than Michael's, Eugen's, Daniel's and I.

Jacques

Le 23/12/2022 à 16:51, Michael Brohl a écrit :
> Hi Jacques,
>
> I am confused. What makes you think that I am against releasing 22.01.01 with JDK 17?
>
> In the contrary, I was the one suggesting to skip JDK 11 in favour of JDK 17.
>
> What I was saying is, that we'll have to do proper testing before releasing 22.01 with JDK 11. In my opinion, testing defines WHEN we can release 
> 22.01 with JDK 17, not if.
>
> Michael
>
>
> Am 22.12.22 um 19:02 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
>> Hi Team,
>>
>> So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions about releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 (OFBIZ-12400).
>>
>> To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. Daniel suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update OFBiz to handle 
>> strong encapsulation.
>>
>> Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 year ago:
>>
>>    <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first stable version during the year 2022.>>
>>
>> And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, after OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using Gradle 7.6 and 
>> JDK 17 by using temporary workarounds.
>>
>> So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?
>>
>> I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to run under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
>> This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we need to push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's not a big deal:
>>
>> -    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack done using Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
>>      applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
>>              ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
>> -            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
>> +            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
>> + '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000', // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
>> + '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', // OFBIZ-12721
>> +            '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' // OFBIZ-12726
>> +            ]
>>
>> To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2 "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.
>>
>> It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as next demos while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.
>>
>> Looking forward for opinions...
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Jacques
>>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de>.
There's a typo in my below statement.

It should read: "What I was saying is, that we'll have to do proper 
testing before releasing 22.01 with JDK 17." (not JDK 11)

Michael


Am 23.12.22 um 16:51 schrieb Michael Brohl:
> Hi Jacques,
>
> I am confused. What makes you think that I am against releasing 
> 22.01.01 with JDK 17?
>
> In the contrary, I was the one suggesting to skip JDK 11 in favour of 
> JDK 17.
>
> What I was saying is, that we'll have to do proper testing before 
> releasing 22.01 with JDK 11. In my opinion, testing defines WHEN we 
> can release 22.01 with JDK 17, not if.
>
> Michael
>
>
> Am 22.12.22 um 19:02 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
>> Hi Team,
>>
>> So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions about 
>> releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 
>> (OFBIZ-12400).
>>
>> To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. Daniel 
>> suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update OFBiz 
>> to handle strong encapsulation.
>>
>> Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of 
>> https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 year ago:
>>
>>    <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first 
>> stable version during the year 2022.>>
>>
>> And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, after 
>> OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using Gradle 
>> 7.6 and JDK 17 by using temporary workarounds.
>>
>> So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 version 
>> under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?
>>
>> I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to run 
>> under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
>> This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we need 
>> to push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's not a big deal:
>>
>> -    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack done 
>> using Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
>>      applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
>>              ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
>> -            : 
>> ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
>> +            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
>> + 
>> '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000', 
>> // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
>> + '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', // 
>> OFBIZ-12721
>> +            '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' // 
>> OFBIZ-12726
>> +            ]
>>
>> To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2 
>> "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.
>>
>> It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as next 
>> demos while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.
>>
>> Looking forward for opinions...
>>
>> Thanks
>>
>> Jacques
>>

Re: [OFBIZ-12400] Releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17

Posted by Michael Brohl <mi...@ecomify.de>.
Hi Jacques,

I am confused. What makes you think that I am against releasing 22.01.01 
with JDK 17?

In the contrary, I was the one suggesting to skip JDK 11 in favour of 
JDK 17.

What I was saying is, that we'll have to do proper testing before 
releasing 22.01 with JDK 11. In my opinion, testing defines WHEN we can 
release 22.01 with JDK 17, not if.

Michael


Am 22.12.22 um 19:02 schrieb Jacques Le Roux:
> Hi Team,
>
> So far, we have only Michael's, Eugen's and Daniel's opinions about 
> releasing the 22.01.01 version under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 (OFBIZ-12400).
>
> To summarize, Michael is against, Eugen and Daniel are for. Daniel 
> suggests that we can use workarounds but need to later update OFBiz to 
> handle strong encapsulation.
>
> Michael, I was surprised by your opinion, because of 
> https://markmail.org/message/fq3fpxeg5yfshjwz where you said 1 year ago:
>
>    <<I am also in favor of a 22.01. branch and releasing a first 
> stable version during the year 2022.>>
>
> And that led me to closely verify the situation. Fortunately, after 
> OFBIZ-12726 (integration tests), I believe we can trust using Gradle 
> 7.6 and JDK 17 by using temporary workarounds.
>
> So my question is, should we vote for releasing the 22.01.01 version 
> under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17 or should we wait 22.01.02?
>
> I have decided on my side to update GH, BuildBot and demos to run 
> under Gradle 7.6 and JDK 17. If nobody is against of course.
> This will take some time, but I don't expect much. For that we need to 
> push the workarounds in all supported branches. It's not a big deal:
>
> -    // jdk.serialFilter is to "Prevent possible DOS attack done using 
> Java deserialisation" (OFBIZ-12592)
>      applicationDefaultJvmArgs = project.hasProperty('jvmArgs')
>              ? jvmArgs.tokenize()
> -            : 
> ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M','-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000']
> +            : ['-Xms128M','-Xmx1024M',
> + 
> '-Djdk.serialFilter=maxarray=100000;maxdepth=20;maxrefs=1000;maxbytes=500000', 
> // OFBIZ-12592 and OFBIZ-12716
> + '--add-exports=java.base/sun.util.calendar=ALL-UNNAMED', // OFBIZ-12721
> +            '--add-opens=java.base/java.util=ALL-UNNAMED' // OFBIZ-12726
> +            ]
>
> To release w/o the workarounds it is enough to remove the 2 
> "ALL-UNNAMED" lines.
>
> It also would be great to freeze a 23.01 branch and use it as next 
> demos while replacing the 18.12 by 22.01 as stable.
>
> Looking forward for opinions...
>
> Thanks
>
> Jacques
>