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