I suggest to use Glassfish artifacts and use 2.3.0 or later. Actually the 2.3.0 version is the best replacement for jdk8 APIs
Enrico Il mer 19 set 2018, 13:55 Sverre Moe <sverre....@gmail.com> ha scritto: > This is what we have done for our legacy application running Java 8. > > By adding the dependencies for JAXB we where able to run our application > with Java 9 and 10 without any other changes needed and still keep > compatibility with Java 8. > > We don't have the compile scope, as we deploy with Java Web Start and need > the JAXB dependencies there in case some client is running Java 9+. > > <dependency> > <groupId>javax.xml.bind</groupId> > <artifactId>jaxb-api</artifactId> > <version>2.2.11</version> > </dependency> > > <dependency> > <groupId>com.sun.xml.bind</groupId> > <artifactId>jaxb-core</artifactId> > <version>2.2.11</version> > </dependency> > > <dependency> > <groupId>com.sun.xml.bind</groupId> > <artifactId>jaxb-impl</artifactId> > <version>2.2.11</version> > </dependency> > > <dependency> > <groupId>javax.activation</groupId> > <artifactId>activation</artifactId> > <version>1.1.1</version> > </dependency> > > This is the Sun JAXB implementation. There is alternatives from Glassfish > and Eclipselink. > > Den tir. 18. sep. 2018 kl. 21:46 skrev Robert Scholte < > rfscho...@apache.org > >: > > > Add them as compile scoped dependencies. The JRE implementation will be > > picked up first, so there should be no issues here. > > AFAIK this is what the jigsaw team suggests to do. (this is actually not > > a > > buildtool specific issue but a general Java issue) > > > > thanks, > > Robert > > > > > > On Fri, 14 Sep 2018 01:21:52 +0200, Bernd Eckenfels > > <e...@zusammenkunft.net> wrote: > > > > > And in addition to Jörgs Questions, do we also have a canonical > > > representation which replacements are actually preferred in ASL land? > > > > > > Gruss > > > Bernd > > > -- > > > http://bernd.eckenfels.net > > > > > > ________________________________ > > > Von: Jörg Schaible <joerg.schai...@gmx.de> > > > Gesendet: Freitag, September 14, 2018 1:16 AM > > > An: users@maven.apache.org > > > Betreff: Java 11 and java.xml.bin, etc. > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > now with Java 11 not containing several jave.ee modules, what's the > best > > > approach for a library that supports still Java 8? I guess profiles > based > > > on the current Java version declaring the missing stuff as dependency > are > > > a bad idea. Should a library developer add the new dependencies > > > nevertheless with compile/runtime scope or as provided or optional to > > > move > > > the responsibility to the library users? What do you recommend? > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Jörg > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > -- -- Enrico Olivelli
