Tibor, I have tested with java.se.ee too and it works fine for me too. I hope we can release 2.21 soon
thank you very much again Enrico 2017-08-18 9:25 GMT+02:00 Tibor Digana <tibor.dig...@googlemail.com>: > Hi Enrico, > > Using "--add-modules java.se.ee" works fine: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *mvn install "-Djdk.home=e:\Program > Files\Java\jdk9"------------------------------------------------------- T > E > S T S-------------------------------------------------------Concurrency > config is parallel='none', perCoreThreadCount=false, threadCount=1, > useUnlimitedThreads=falseRunning > org.apache.maven.surefire.its.Java9FullApiITTests run: 3, Failures: 0, > Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 31.583 secRunning > org.apache.maven.surefire.its.jiras.Surefire1265Java9ITTests run: 1, > Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0, Time elapsed: 4.905 secResults :Tests > run: 4, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0* > > > On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 12:40 AM, Tibor Digana < > tibor.dig...@googlemail.com> > wrote: > > > I am going to run the build with > > --add-modules java.se.ee > > > > If this will work for me then pls confirm that I can commit it to master. > > > > On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 11:18 PM, Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> On mer 16 ago 2017, 08:19 Tibor Digana <tibor.dig...@googlemail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > Still I do not understand what is the difference between *all_system* > >> > and *java.se.ee > >> > <http://java.se.ee>*. > >> > Is it a bug that proprietary package *jdk.incubator.httpclient* is in > >> the > >> > warning? It looks like it wants to be exposed out of the jdk to our > >> > application which is not legal but then why jdk allows. > >> > > >> > >> I see your headache with this. > >> Maybe we could add only java.se.ee and document how to change to > >> all_system. > >> I will check the actual difference for normal applications > >> > >> > >> Cheers > >> Enrico > >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Aug 16, 2017 at 8:06 AM, Enrico Olivelli <eolive...@gmail.com > > > >> > wrote: > >> > > >> > > Il mer 16 ago 2017, 02:44 Tibor Digana <tibordig...@apache.org> ha > >> > > scritto: > >> > > > >> > > > Hi Enrico, > >> > > > > >> > > > It does not appear on console output however it is stored as > native > >> > > std/out > >> > > > in target/surefire-reports/2017-08-13T23-52-13_184.dumpstream > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > Yep, it is as I suspected. If we want ro get rid of it we have to > only > >> > add > >> > > java.se.ee module > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > On Tue, Aug 15, 2017 at 5:51 PM, Enrico Olivelli [via Maven] < > >> > > > ml+s40175n5912520...@n5.nabble.com> wrote: > >> > > > > >> > > > > Il dom 13 ago 2017, 17:31 Tibor Digana <[hidden email] > >> > > > > <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5912520&i=0>> ha > >> > > > > scritto: > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > I found an issue. JDK printed this on std/out: > >> > > > > > WARNING: Using incubator modules: jdk.incubator.httpclient > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > IMHO This is because we are importing all system modules. Maybe > >> > > importing > >> > > > > only java.se.ee would cover most of the cases. > >> > > > > I did not notice the warning on test I have run today > >> > > > > > >> > > > > Enrico > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > It hapens after my test: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > import org.junit.Test; > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > public class J9Test > >> > > > > > { > >> > > > > > @Test > >> > > > > > public void testMiscellaneousAPI() throws > >> java.sql.SQLException > >> > > > > > { > >> > > > > > System.out.println( "loaded class " + > >> > > > > > java.sql.SQLException.class.getName() ); > >> > > > > > System.out.println( "loaded class " + > >> > > > > > javax.xml.ws.Holder.class.getName() ); > >> > > > > > System.out.println( "loaded class " + > >> > > > > > javax.xml.bind.JAXBException.class.getName() ); > >> > > > > > System.out.println( "loaded class " + > >> > > > > > org.omg.CORBA.BAD_INV_ORDER.class.getName() ); > >> > > > > > System.out.println( "loaded class " + > >> > > > > > javax.xml.xpath.XPath.class.getName() ); > >> > > > > > System.out.println( "java.specification.version=" + > >> > > > > > System.getProperty( "java.specification.version" ) ); > >> > > > > > } > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > @Test > >> > > > > > public void test_corba_mod() throws > >> org.omg.CORBA.BAD_INV_ORDER > >> > > > > > { > >> > > > > > } > >> > > > > > } > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 5:29 PM, Tibor Digana <[hidden email] > >> > > > > <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5912520&i=1> > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > But why to add it? It's a hack. I do not use > module-info.java > >> and > >> > > so > >> > > > > > there > >> > > > > > > is no reason to break the backwards compatibility. > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > This is no more about Maven. It is about entire Java world. > >> > > > > > > If we in Maven do it then everybody has to. > >> > > > > > > And I am sure that the voices says that Kotlin is better and > >> > Scala > >> > > is > >> > > > > > > better would make sense. Why to help these attempts to > >> happen? No > >> > > > > reason! > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > On Sun, Aug 13, 2017 at 5:11 PM, Gary Gregory <[hidden > email] > >> > > > > <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5912520&i=2>> > >> > > > > > > wrote: > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> Is there a Maven way to add ALL-SYSTEM to everything? Using > >> > plugin > >> > > > > > >> specific > >> > > > > > >> tags like below is going to be painful. > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> Gary > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> On Aug 13, 2017 07:30, "Tibor Digana" <[hidden email] > >> > > > > <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5912520&i=3>> wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > Hi @Enrico, > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > I am very unhappy with Java 9 status and very afraid. > >> > > > > > >> > I do not like the style how Oracle has changed Java to > >> Java 9 > >> > > and > >> > > > > > forced > >> > > > > > >> > all the world to use additional effort to adapt to Oracle > >> > > > > activities. > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > I am facing more unhappy Java development teams with Java > >> 9 in > >> > > the > >> > > > > > >> future. > >> > > > > > >> > For instance as I have tried to implement users wish in > >> Maven > >> > > > > Surefire > >> > > > > > >> > project and invested my personal time and effort to adapt > >> to > >> > > > Oracle > >> > > > > > >> > requirements, this still does not convince me to say that > >> > Java 9 > >> > > > is > >> > > > > > >> ready > >> > > > > > >> > to go. > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > This is my comment from Jira: > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > "This is not nice on Java 9 that they broke backwards > >> > > > compatibility > >> > > > > > and > >> > > > > > >> > force the world to use the switch to use --add-modules > >> > > ALL-SYSTEM > >> > > > > > >> instead > >> > > > > > >> > of providing all modules installed in JRE. For instance, > >> small > >> > > JRE > >> > > > > > >> having > >> > > > > > >> > {{java.base}} has advantage on embedded systems and the > >> only > >> > > > should > >> > > > > be > >> > > > > > >> > propagated. Big scope JRE should propagate all installed > >> > > modules. > >> > > > > > >> > But for me it does not make security sense and common > >> sense to > >> > > > > force > >> > > > > > >> JRE to > >> > > > > > >> > provide modules. It should be opposite and the > >> admin/Jenkins > >> > > > should > >> > > > > > >> > configure big scope JRE with selected modules propagated > to > >> > Java > >> > > > > > runtime > >> > > > > > >> > applications. > >> > > > > > >> > If this admin does not do that then all modules should be > >> > > > available > >> > > > > by > >> > > > > > >> > default which is backwards compatibility for me and we do > >> not > >> > > have > >> > > > > to > >> > > > > > to > >> > > > > > >> > implement these stupid tricks." > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > As far as we remember Java Security, the policies can be > >> > > > > configured. > >> > > > > > >> > I can imaging same paradigm in Jigsaw/Java 9 and then the > >> > admin > >> > > > who > >> > > > > > has > >> > > > > > >> > installed JDK or JRE would "switch off" some modules. But > >> > > > opposite, > >> > > > > > that > >> > > > > > >> > means the script which starts Java app currently enables > >> "all" > >> > > > > modules > >> > > > > > >> is > >> > > > > > >> > against security and against the principle of modular > >> system > >> > > > > because > >> > > > > > the > >> > > > > > >> > modules do not make sense then. > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > What makes sense to me is to enable "all java/javax" > >> modules > >> > > > except > >> > > > > > for > >> > > > > > >> the > >> > > > > > >> > "com.sun" proprietary ones by default. > >> > > > > > >> > So yes enable them by default and please release specific > >> JRE > >> > > > > > >> installations > >> > > > > > >> > with specific bunch of Java modules for specific use > cases. > >> > > > > > >> > This means those modules in that particular release are > all > >> > > > enabled > >> > > > > by > >> > > > > > >> > default if not configured otherwise by admin, e.g. > Jenkins, > >> > > > > operation > >> > > > > > >> > staff, etc. (do NOT mean Sun packages - never visible). > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > Here it comes. The idea that we can install small 5MB/JRE > >> on > >> > > small > >> > > > > > Linux > >> > > > > > >> > device would be possible because Oracle would release > such > >> > tiny > >> > > > JRE > >> > > > > > >> using > >> > > > > > >> > only "java.lang" and then another JRE installation using > >> > > java.lang > >> > > > > and > >> > > > > > >> > java.utils, and later NIO and later "java.desktop", etc. > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > Then vendors of web browsers and Linux dist would be > happy > >> to > >> > > > > > integrate > >> > > > > > >> > small JRE into and use JavaFX. > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > But now it is not possible because the modules are > >> basically > >> > > > three: > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > java.base == 37MB > >> > > > > > >> > java.desktop == 36MB > >> > > > > > >> > java.xml ==20MB > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > All the other modules are pretty small but these three > >> seen in > >> > > > > > "src.zip" > >> > > > > > >> > make the modular system unbalanced in size and nobody > would > >> > ever > >> > > > > wish > >> > > > > > to > >> > > > > > >> > integrate them because they are still big. That means the > >> > > problem > >> > > > > that > >> > > > > > >> > Oracle has with NIO implementation in com.sun package > >> > propagated > >> > > > to > >> > > > > > >> > "java.util", nobody in the world care and nobody should > see > >> > as a > >> > > > > > >> problem to > >> > > > > > >> > split "java.base" much more. > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > If splitting "java.base" happened then not certified JVMs > >> > > > developed > >> > > > > at > >> > > > > > >> > Universities would for instance implement only > "java.lang" > >> and > >> > > > > embed > >> > > > > > it > >> > > > > > >> in > >> > > > > > >> > to JVM and develop a new programming language on the top > of > >> > > Java. > >> > > > > But > >> > > > > > >> > implementing 10 packages in java.base is an effort again. > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > One more thing is regarding the size of the modules. > >> > > > > > >> > You really did not help embedded systems and > installations > >> of > >> > > > > > browsers. > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 8:51 AM, Enrico Olivelli <[hidden > >> > email] > >> > > > > <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5912520&i=4> > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > > I would like to share my current pom configuration > which > >> > lets > >> > > me > >> > > > > to > >> > > > > > >> > > build and test java8 apps on latest and greatest jdk9 > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > This profile is activated when using jdk9. > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > This is based on a suggestion of Robert, its suggestion > >> for > >> > > the > >> > > > > > >> > > javadoc plugin is working great with surefire too > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > <profile> > >> > > > > > >> > > <id>jdk9</id> > >> > > > > > >> > > <activation> > >> > > > > > >> > > <jdk>[9,)</jdk> > >> > > > > > >> > > </activation> > >> > > > > > >> > > <build> > >> > > > > > >> > > <plugins> > >> > > > > > >> > > <plugin> > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId> > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > <artifactId>maven-javadoc-plugin</artifactId> > >> > > > > > >> > > <configuration> > >> > > > > > >> > > <additionalparam>--add- > >> modules > >> > > > > > >> > > ALL-SYSTEM</additionalparam> > >> > > > > > >> > > </configuration> > >> > > > > > >> > > </plugin> > >> > > > > > >> > > <plugin> > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > <groupId>org.apache.maven.plugins</groupId> > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > <artifactId>maven-surefire-pl > >> > > > > > >> ugin</artifactId> > >> > > > > > >> > > <version>2.20</version> > >> > > > > > >> > > <configuration> > >> > > > > > >> > > <argLine>--add-modules > >> > > > > > >> ALL-SYSTEM</argLine> > >> > > > > > >> > > </configuration> > >> > > > > > >> > > </plugin> > >> > > > > > >> > > </plugins> > >> > > > > > >> > > </build> > >> > > > > > >> > > </profile> > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > -- Enrico > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > 2017-04-24 19:08 GMT+02:00 Karl Heinz Marbaise <[hidden > >> > email] > >> > > > > <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5912520&i=5>>: > >> > > > > > >> > > > Hi, > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > yes I will do within this week... > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > Kind regards > >> > > > > > >> > > > Karl Heinz Marbaise > >> > > > > > >> > > > On 23/04/17 21:37, Enrico Olivelli wrote: > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > > >> Thank you Robert, > >> > > > > > >> > > >> I saw that you have merged my patch. > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > > >> Is there any plan to release the new version of the > >> war > >> > > > > plugin? > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > > >> Enrico > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > > >> Il gio 13 apr 2017, 12:21 Paul Hammant <[hidden > email] > >> > > > > <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5912520&i=6>> ha > >> > > > > > >> scritto: > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > >> > > > > > >> > > >>>> > >> > > > > > >> > > >>>> > >> > > > > > >> > > >>>>> I don't see any activity either, so my idea is to > >> > > replace > >> > > > > > >> XStream, > >> > > > > > >> > > see > >> > > > > > >> > > >>>> > >> > > > > > >> > > >>>> MWAR-397[1] > >> > > > > > >> > > >>>> > >> > > > > > >> > > >>> > >> > > > > > >> > > >>> Just for the record, Jörg is working through the > >> Java9 > >> > > > issues > >> > > > > > for > >> > > > > > >> > > XStream > >> > > > > > >> > > >>> presently - https://github.com/x-stream/ > >> > > > > xstream/commits/master > >> > > > > > >> > > >>> > >> > > > > > >> > > >>> - Paul > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > ------------------------------ > >> > > ------------------------------ > >> > > > > > >> --------- > >> > > > > > >> > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] > >> > > > > <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5912520&i=7> > >> > > > > > >> > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email] > >> > > > > <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5912520&i=8> > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> > > --------- > >> > > > > > >> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] > >> > > > > <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5912520&i=9> > >> > > > > > >> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email] > >> > > > > <http:///user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=5912520&i=10> > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > >> > > > > > >> > > >> > > > > > >> > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > -- > >> > > > > > > Cheers > >> > > > > > > Tibor > >> > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > -- > >> > > > > > Cheers > >> > > > > > Tibor > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > -- > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > -- Enrico Olivelli > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > ------------------------------ > >> > > > > If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the > >> > > discussion > >> > > > > below: > >> > > > > > >> > > > http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Building-a-Java9-project- > >> > > just-using-JDK9- > >> > > > > tp5905517p5912520.html > >> > > > > To start a new topic under Maven Developers, email > >> > > > > ml+s40175n142166...@n5.nabble.com > >> > > > > To unsubscribe from Maven Developers, click here > >> > > > > < > >> > > > http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp? > >> > > macro=unsubscribe_by_code&node=142166&code=dGlib3JkaWdhbmFAY > >> XBhY2hlLm9yZ3 > >> > > wxNDIxNjZ8LTI4OTQ5MjEwMg== > >> > > > > > >> > > > > . > >> > > > > NAML > >> > > > > < > >> > > > http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/template/NamlServlet.jtp? > >> > > macro=macro_viewer&id=instant_html%21nabble%3Aemail.naml& > >> > > base=nabble.naml.namespaces.BasicNamespace-nabble.view. > >> > > web.template.NabbleNamespace-nabble.view.web.template. > >> > > NodeNamespace&breadcrumbs=notify_subscribers%21nabble% > >> > > 3Aemail.naml-instant_emails%21nabble%3Aemail.naml-send_ > >> > > instant_email%21nabble%3Aemail.naml > >> > > > > > >> > > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > >> > > > -- > >> > > > View this message in context: > >> > > > http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Building-a-Java9-project- > >> > > just-using-JDK9-tp5905517p5912569.html > >> > > > Sent from the Maven Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >> > > > >> > > -- > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > -- Enrico Olivelli > >> > > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -- > >> > Cheers > >> > Tibor > >> > > >> -- > >> > >> > >> -- Enrico Olivelli > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Cheers > > Tibor > > > > > > -- > Cheers > Tibor >
