Re: JDK 9: General Availability

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: JDK 9: General Availability

Volker Simonis
On Thu, Sep 21, 2017 at 9:21 PM,  <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'm pleased -- nay, thrilled! -- to announce that JDK 9 is now Generally
> Available.  We've identified no P1 bugs since we promoted build 181 seven
> weeks ago so that is the official GA release, ready for production use.
>
> GPL'd binaries from Oracle are available here:
>
>   http://jdk.java.net/9
>
> (There are links on that page to Oracle's commercial binaries for those
> who are interested.)  I'm sure that binaries from other implementors will
> be available in short order.
>

Hi Mark,

on the one side I'm really happy to see that Java 9 has finally been
released (with some of our contributions inside :) On the other hand
however, I'm a little sad because I know for sure that the released
version doesn't pass all of the current TCK 9 tests (but unfortunately
I'm not allowed to say you which ones - at least not publicly :) So
either Oracle cheated (which I don't believe), or they run the tests
with a different "Exclude List", which isn't fair either.

But I don't write this mail to blame anybody. Instead, the real intent
is to urge you and Oracle to finally open source the TCK and make it
available along side the OpenJDK reference implementation. Only if the
TCK will be developed openly and in parallel with the reference
implementation, we will have a transparent way of discussing and
improving the conformance tests and only then it will be possible to
transparently certify one's own implementation as well as verifying
the implementation of others being standards conforming.

Finally, having an open TCK is even more important with the new,
six-monthly release cycle and the release of the new Eclipse OpenJ9
version of Java [1] which gives the users an even bigger choice
between various Java SE implementations. I think an open Java SE TCK
will be crucial here to ensure the stability of the Java platform and
prevent fragmentation.

Thank you and best regards,
Volker

[1] http://www.eclipse.org/openj9/

> The key feature of this release is, of course, Project Jigsaw, about
> which I've written a bit more over on my blog:
>
>   https://mreinhold.org/blog/jigsaw-complete
>
> Jigsaw is not, however, the only feature!  There are many other excellent
> additions and improvements including, but not limited to:
>
>   Improved Process API           http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/102
>   HTTP/2 Client (incubating)     http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/110
>   Variable Handles               http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/193
>   JShell Read-Eval-Print Loop    http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/222
>   Javadoc Search                 http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/225
>   Linux/AArch64 Port             http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/237
>   Marlin Graphics Renderer       http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/265
>   Collection Factories           http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/269
>   Enhanced Deprecation           http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/277
>   Linux/s390x Port               http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/294
>   Ahead-of-Time Compilation      http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/295
>
> The complete list of features is on the JDK 9 Project page:
>
>   http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk9/
>
> Thank you to everyone who contributed to JDK 9, whether directly or
> indirectly.  It's been a long road, but it will have been worth it.
> This release lays a strong foundation for the future of Java.
>
> - Mark
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: JDK 9: General Availability

dalibor topic-2


On 22.09.2017 18:21, Volker Simonis wrote:

> improving the conformance tests and only then it will be possible to
> transparently certify one's own implementation as well as verifying
> the implementation of others being standards conforming.

'Verifying' wouldn't work, if you think a bit further about how that
would play out in practice. Failure to reproduce results of others could
have any number of benign reasons without cause for alarm.

For a related, timely discussion in the field of science, please see
https://news.northeastern.edu/2015/09/failure-to-reproduce-results-is-a-normal-part-of-how-science-works/ 
.

cheers,
dalibor topic
--
<http://www.oracle.com> Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager
Phone: +494089091214 <tel:+494089091214> | Mobile: +491737185961
<tel:+491737185961>

ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Kühnehöfe 5 | 22761 Hamburg

ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG
Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 München
Registergericht: Amtsgericht München, HRA 95603

Komplementärin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V.
Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande
Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697
Geschäftsführer: Alexander van der Ven, Jan Schultheiss, Val Maher

<http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to developing
practices and products that help protect the environment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: JDK 9: General Availability

Volker Simonis
dalibor topic <[hidden email]> schrieb am Fr. 22. Sep. 2017 um
22:30:

>
>
> On 22.09.2017 18:21, Volker Simonis wrote:
>
> > improving the conformance tests and only then it will be possible to
> > transparently certify one's own implementation as well as verifying
> > the implementation of others being standards conforming.
>
> 'Verifying' wouldn't work, if you think a bit further about how that
> would play out in practice. Failure to reproduce results of others could
> have any number of benign reasons without cause for alarm.


> For a related, timely discussion in the field of science, please see
>
> https://news.northeastern.edu/2015/09/failure-to-reproduce-results-is-a-normal-part-of-how-science-works/
> .
>

I hope you don't want to propose that nobody should publish any scientific
findings in the future just because their reproduction by others may fail.
That sounds a little "Trumpish" to make obscurity great again :)

For our concrete problem (i.e. a JCK certification run) publishing the
complete certification data (especially all the .jtr files) would give a
pretty good overview of what people really did. And if this data still
leaves open questions which are debatable - that would actually be great!
That would be fruitful for everybody: the Java community, the Java
implementations, the Java specification and last but not least, for the TCK
itself!

I know that big companies love "security by obscurity" (I'm working for one
myself ;) But that's not my personal opinion. Instead, I think an open TCK
would help the Java ecosystem just as much as the OpenJDK did.

Open sourcing the TCK for Java EE is a good step into the right direction.
However if Oracle wants to be taken seriously with this step, open sourcing
the Jave SE TCK must be the direct consequence. Otherwise there's a danger
that the whole Java EE open sourcing story may look a little like riding a
dead horse :)

Regards,
Volker


> cheers,
> dalibor topic
> --
> <http://www.oracle.com> Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager
> Phone: +494089091214 <tel:+494089091214> | Mobile: +491737185961
> <tel:+491737185961>
>
> ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Kühnehöfe 5 | 22761 H
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=KG+%7C+K%C3%BChneh%C3%B6fe+5+%7C+22761+H&entry=gmail&source=g>
> amburg
>
> ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG
> Hauptverwaltung: Riess
> <https://maps.google.com/?q=tung:+Riess&entry=gmail&source=g>tr. 25,
> D-80992 München
> Registergericht: Amtsgericht München, HRA 95603
>
> Komplementärin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V.
> Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande
> Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697
> Geschäftsführer: Alexander van der Ven, Jan Schultheiss, Val Maher
>
> <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to developing
> practices and products that help protect the environment
>