Re: JEP 411 - end of Apache River?

FWIW, I don't see any reason to think that JEP-411 means the end of River. My reason for saying that is two-fold: 1. My use cases for River are mostly in the context of a trusted environment where one entity controls all the code end to end and the SecurityManager stuff isn't all that important.

Re: JEP 411 - end of Apache River?

On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 10:43 PM Jeremy R. Easton-Marks < j.r.eastonma...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm not sure how much JEP 411 will impact River. I agree with the overall > direction that it proposes in removing the security manager. However, I am > worried that removing security features is going to

Re: JEP 411 - end of Apache River?

Yeah, this is not the right place for this rant. But was curious what the River community thinks about it. Michał > On 30 Apr 2021, at 17:59, Jeremy R. Easton-Marks > wrote: > > Hi Michal, > I think you should definitely share your opinions about this ( > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse

Re: JEP 411 - end of Apache River?

Hi Michal, I think you should definitely share your opinions about this ( https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8264713). I think they may not know about Apache River and they probably should address the issues around dynamically loaded code. I would cite other Java examples other than just Rive

Re: JEP 411 - end of Apache River?

> On 30 Apr 2021, at 04:42, Jeremy R. Easton-Marks > wrote: > > I'm not sure how much JEP 411 will impact River. I agree with the overall > direction that it proposes in removing the security manager. IMHO JEP 411 gives unconvincing reasons to ditch SecurityManager: - brittle permission mode

Re: JEP 411 - end of Apache River?

The IOT space is huge. It would be great to be relevant to more of it. Bryan On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 19:44 Bryan Thompson wrote: > +1 > > On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 19:43 Jeremy R. Easton-Marks < > j.r.eastonma...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I'm not sure how much JEP 411 will impact River. I agree with

Re: JEP 411 - end of Apache River?

+1 On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 19:43 Jeremy R. Easton-Marks < j.r.eastonma...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'm not sure how much JEP 411 will impact River. I agree with the overall > direction that it proposes in removing the security manager. However, I am > worried that removing security features is going t

Re: JEP 411 - end of Apache River?

I'm not sure how much JEP 411 will impact River. I agree with the overall direction that it proposes in removing the security manager. However, I am worried that removing security features is going to cause some other problems in the Java ecosystem. Beyond the potential impact of River. I do think

Re: JEP 411 - end of Apache River?

On Thu, Apr 29, 2021 at 11:40 AM Roy T. Fielding wrote: > > On Apr 28, 2021, at 9:24 PM, Michał Kłeczek wrote: > > > > Hi All, > > > > I’ve just learned JEP 411 (https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/411 < > https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/411>) moved to Candidate status. > > > > Does this JEP mean end of

Re: JEP 411 - end of Apache River?

> On Apr 28, 2021, at 9:24 PM, Michał Kłeczek wrote: > > Hi All, > > I’ve just learned JEP 411 (https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/411 > ) moved to Candidate status. > > Does this JEP mean end of mobile code and hence Apache River? No, it's just code. If the code

JEP 411 - end of Apache River?

Hi All, I’ve just learned JEP 411 (https://openjdk.java.net/jeps/411 ) moved to Candidate status. Does this JEP mean end of mobile code and hence Apache River? Thanks, Michal