FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 07-26-2011, 06:35 AM
Alexander Kurtakov
 
Default Java 7 for Fedora 16

On 09:33:51 Monday 25 July 2011 Deepak Bhole wrote:
> * Bill Nottingham <notting@redhat.com> [2011-07-25 15:54]:
> > Toshio Kuratomi (a.badger@gmail.com) said:
> > > Robyn and I have talked about how the feature process could be adapted
> > > to allow for more late work to occur however none of that talk has
> > > turned into anything solid yet. One point that bears on this is that
> > > the Feature Owners must be willing to commit to doing all the work
> > > involved in coordination when they submit something late. In other
> > > words, if Java 7 update went in well before the feature deadline, the
> > > expectation would be that packagers whose packages depended on Java
> > > would need to adapt to Java 7. The expectation now that the Feature
> > > Freeze has passed is that the people pushing Java 7 into the repos
> > > would also need to seek out and fix all the packages that depend on
> > > them that are broken.
> >
> > Would we actually be shipping only 7, or both 6 and 7?
>
> This hasn't been debated yet, but I am very much in favour of having
> only 7 in Fedora 16.

The less duplicating packages we have - the better . I'm all for reducing
the number of jvms we ship (assuming that OpenJDK 7 doesn't break many
things).

Alexander Kurtakov

>
> If the reason for asking was w.r.t re-builds, it is unlikely that most
> applications will need a rebuild -- only those using deprecated APIs
> (which would have been deprecated for years now) and private APIs would
> be affected. That would likely be a small subset.
>
> Opinions from others are welcome..
>
> Cheers,
> Deepak
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 07-26-2011, 07:05 AM
Toshio Kuratomi
 
Default Java 7 for Fedora 16

On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 11:22:08PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
> On Sat, 2011-07-23 at 14:00 -0700, Douglas Myers–Turnbull wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Just something I wanted to bring to attention:
> >
> > Java 7 is slated for release (after years of hassle and heated debate)
> > on 28 July, 2011.
> > I think this would be an important feature to include for the Fedora
> > 16 release, and the months between Java's release and Fedora 16's 25
> > October release would allow plenty of time to integrate Java 7. If I'm
> > not mistaken, if Java 7 isn't released this time around, it won't be
> > in Fedora until the Fedora 17 release rolls around, nearly a year (!)
> > after Java 7 is released.
> >
> > I created an unfinished, skeletal feature page here:
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Java7
> > Unfortunately, I don't have the knowledge to help build it. I'm
> > announcing it here in case whoever maintains Java 6 in Fedora, or
> > someone else, is interested.
>
> as I always point out when this comes up, in the hopes that it'll
> eventually irritate someone enough that they go fix the feature process,
> the option is open to simply put Java 7 in without it being a 'Fedora
> feature'. If you do it that way, you could do it right up to, hmm, the
> post-Beta final freeze without there being any firm policy grounds on
> which to object to the change. it's only if you declare it to be a
> Feature that FESCo is clearly empowered to tell you you can't do it.
>
> (I note with interest Toshio's neat caveat to this, which appears later
> in the thread.)
>
Actually, I'd consider this to be very bad advice. There have been several
Features over the past few releases that FESCo has decided on late. Those
things were sometimes made into features only after prompting by people who
realized that the changes were unannounced features.

Things that require coordination between maintainers are a feature and FESCo
has a right to veto them whether the authors of the feature have followed
the feature process or not. The policy encompasses anything defined as
a feature:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Policy/Definitions

-Toshio
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 07-26-2011, 07:15 AM
Peter Robinson
 
Default Java 7 for Fedora 16

On Mon, Jul 25, 2011 at 4:30 PM, Deepak Bhole <dbhole@redhat.com> wrote:

* Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger@gmail.com> [2011-07-23 20:03]:

> On Sat, Jul 23, 2011 at 02:00:24PM -0700, Douglas Myers–Turnbull wrote:

> > Hi,

> >

> > Just something I wanted to bring to attention:

> >

> > Java 7 is slated for release (after years of hassle and heated debate)

> > on 28 July, 2011.

> > I think this would be an important feature to include for the Fedora

> > 16 release, and the months between Java's release and Fedora 16's 25

> > October release would allow plenty of time to integrate Java 7. If I'm

> > not mistaken, if Java 7 isn't released this time around, it won't be

> > in Fedora until the Fedora 17 release rolls around, nearly a year (!)

> > after Java 7 is released.

> >

> > I created an unfinished, skeletal feature page here:

> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Java7

> > Unfortunately, I don't have the knowledge to help build it. I'm

> > announcing it here in case whoever maintains Java 6 in Fedora, or

> > someone else, is interested.

> >



I was planning to do this myself .. glad you started it I can take

over the Feature and doing all the work if you're fine with it...



> The alpha change deadline is a week and three days away so this is very

> likely too late. *If you want to try to get an exception to get this in, you

> need to get the Java SIG excited to do it, get the Feature page finished

> (with estimates of how much time it will take to finish and who will do the

> work) and put it before FESCo/Feature Wrangler to see if they'll grant an

> exception.

>

> Judging by the state things are in now, I don't know that it looks too

> hopeful unless you get some Java SIG people to commit to working on it.

>



This is doable by the Alpha deadline. The main holdup for us has been a

lack of OpenJDK TCK for v7. The actual RPM can be written fairly

quickly. We were hopeful that we'd be able to push a more tested initial

version. But given the deadlines, it appears we will have to push

whatever we have right now and modify/fix it as needed when we have the

TCK.



Personally I would much sooner you wait until the feature deadline has passed and we've branched the release and then push it directly to the new F-17 rawhide so a better impact of what it breaks can be seen. If at that point its all fairly minor only then review and see what it would take to push back into F-16. A rushed effort will only cause chaos right when we're suppose to be tightening and stabilising the release.


If java se 7 was going to be in F-16 there should have been RCs in there for some time, the rough date for release has been known for some time and it should be planned.

Peter

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 07-26-2011, 07:21 AM
Adam Williamson
 
Default Java 7 for Fedora 16

On Tue, 2011-07-26 at 00:05 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:

> > as I always point out when this comes up, in the hopes that it'll
> > eventually irritate someone enough that they go fix the feature process,
> > the option is open to simply put Java 7 in without it being a 'Fedora
> > feature'. If you do it that way, you could do it right up to, hmm, the
> > post-Beta final freeze without there being any firm policy grounds on
> > which to object to the change. it's only if you declare it to be a
> > Feature that FESCo is clearly empowered to tell you you can't do it.
> >
> > (I note with interest Toshio's neat caveat to this, which appears later
> > in the thread.)
> >
> Actually, I'd consider this to be very bad advice. There have been several
> Features over the past few releases that FESCo has decided on late. Those
> things were sometimes made into features only after prompting by people who
> realized that the changes were unannounced features.
>
> Things that require coordination between maintainers are a feature and FESCo
> has a right to veto them whether the authors of the feature have followed
> the feature process or not. The policy encompasses anything defined as
> a feature:
>
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Policy/Definitions

I agree! It is very bad advice, and it wasn't actually meant as advice
(apologies for the very bad wording here, I had four hours of sleep last
night and wrote that on the tenth hour of a train ride), but more as my
traditional monthly snipe at the gap in the feature process. So, I went
and did something a bit more productive:

https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/653

hope that's useful.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw
http://www.happyassassin.net

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 07-28-2011, 02:41 PM
Marek Goldmann
 
Default Java 7 for Fedora 16

On 25 lip 2011, at 17:30, Deepak Bhole wrote:

>>> I created an unfinished, skeletal feature page here:
>>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Java7
>>> Unfortunately, I don't have the knowledge to help build it. I'm
>>> announcing it here in case whoever maintains Java 6 in Fedora, or
>>> someone else, is interested.
>>>
>
> I was planning to do this myself .. glad you started it I can take
> over the Feature and doing all the work if you're fine with it...

Anything new in this topic?

As I'm trying to include JBoss AS7 in Fedora:

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JBossAS7

I'm very interested in having JDK7 packaged because it is required to build one of JBoss AS7 dependencies (XNIO).

Thanks!

--Marek

--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 07-28-2011, 03:00 PM
Deepak Bhole
 
Default Java 7 for Fedora 16

* Marek Goldmann <mgoldman@redhat.com> [2011-07-28 10:41]:
>
> On 25 lip 2011, at 17:30, Deepak Bhole wrote:
>
> >>> I created an unfinished, skeletal feature page here:
> >>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Java7
> >>> Unfortunately, I don't have the knowledge to help build it. I'm
> >>> announcing it here in case whoever maintains Java 6 in Fedora, or
> >>> someone else, is interested.
> >>>
> >
> > I was planning to do this myself .. glad you started it I can take
> > over the Feature and doing all the work if you're fine with it...
>
> Anything new in this topic?
>
> As I'm trying to include JBoss AS7 in Fedora:
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JBossAS7
>
> I'm very interested in having JDK7 packaged because it is required to build one of JBoss AS7 dependencies (XNIO).
>

Hi Marek,

Yes, we are just sorting out some stuff on the team side (to figure out
most feasible/maintainable approach). As soon as that is done, I will push a
java-1.7.0-openjdk package.

The alpha deadline is on Tuesday and I hope (.. ) to have it built and in
before then.

Cheers,
Deepak
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 07-29-2011, 02:31 PM
Omair Majid
 
Default Java 7 for Fedora 16

On 07/25/2011 04:04 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
> * Bill Nottingham<notting@redhat.com> [2011-07-25 15:54]:
>> Toshio Kuratomi (a.badger@gmail.com) said:
>>> Robyn and I have talked about how the feature process could be adapted to
>>> allow for more late work to occur however none of that talk has turned into
>>> anything solid yet. One point that bears on this is that the Feature Owners
>>> must be willing to commit to doing all the work involved in coordination
>>> when they submit something late. In other words, if Java 7 update went in
>>> well before the feature deadline, the expectation would be that packagers
>>> whose packages depended on Java would need to adapt to Java 7. The
>>> expectation now that the Feature Freeze has passed is that the people
>>> pushing Java 7 into the repos would also need to seek out and fix all the
>>> packages that depend on them that are broken.
>>
>> Would we actually be shipping only 7, or both 6 and 7?
>>
>
> This hasn't been debated yet, but I am very much in favour of having
> only 7 in Fedora 16.
>
> If the reason for asking was w.r.t re-builds, it is unlikely that most
> applications will need a rebuild -- only those using deprecated APIs
> (which would have been deprecated for years now) and private APIs would
> be affected. That would likely be a small subset.

Have you seen the list of incompatibilities?

http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/compatibility-417013.html

Cheers,
Omair
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 07-29-2011, 02:55 PM
Deepak Bhole
 
Default Java 7 for Fedora 16

* Omair Majid <omajid@redhat.com> [2011-07-29 10:32]:
> On 07/25/2011 04:04 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
> >* Bill Nottingham<notting@redhat.com> [2011-07-25 15:54]:
> >>Toshio Kuratomi (a.badger@gmail.com) said:
> >>>Robyn and I have talked about how the feature process could be adapted to
> >>>allow for more late work to occur however none of that talk has turned into
> >>>anything solid yet. One point that bears on this is that the Feature Owners
> >>>must be willing to commit to doing all the work involved in coordination
> >>>when they submit something late. In other words, if Java 7 update went in
> >>>well before the feature deadline, the expectation would be that packagers
> >>>whose packages depended on Java would need to adapt to Java 7. The
> >>>expectation now that the Feature Freeze has passed is that the people
> >>>pushing Java 7 into the repos would also need to seek out and fix all the
> >>>packages that depend on them that are broken.
> >>
> >>Would we actually be shipping only 7, or both 6 and 7?
> >>
> >
> >This hasn't been debated yet, but I am very much in favour of having
> >only 7 in Fedora 16.
> >
> >If the reason for asking was w.r.t re-builds, it is unlikely that most
> >applications will need a rebuild -- only those using deprecated APIs
> >(which would have been deprecated for years now) and private APIs would
> >be affected. That would likely be a small subset.
>
> Have you seen the list of incompatibilities?
>
> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/compatibility-417013.html
>

Thanks. I hadn't seen the full list, but I knew it'd fairly small
given how much importance compatibility has been given in the past and
for 7.

Unfortunately it is not possible to gauge how much Fedora will be
affected by that :/ My biggest concern would be for apps using sun.*
APIs. As mentioned above though, it should be a small percentage.

Cheers,
Deepak
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 08-01-2011, 10:28 AM
Marcela Mašláňová
 
Default Java 7 for Fedora 16

On 07/29/2011 04:55 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
> * Omair Majid <omajid@redhat.com> [2011-07-29 10:32]:
>> On 07/25/2011 04:04 PM, Deepak Bhole wrote:
>>> * Bill Nottingham<notting@redhat.com> [2011-07-25 15:54]:
>>>> Toshio Kuratomi (a.badger@gmail.com) said:
>>>>> Robyn and I have talked about how the feature process could be adapted to
>>>>> allow for more late work to occur however none of that talk has turned into
>>>>> anything solid yet. One point that bears on this is that the Feature Owners
>>>>> must be willing to commit to doing all the work involved in coordination
>>>>> when they submit something late. In other words, if Java 7 update went in
>>>>> well before the feature deadline, the expectation would be that packagers
>>>>> whose packages depended on Java would need to adapt to Java 7. The
>>>>> expectation now that the Feature Freeze has passed is that the people
>>>>> pushing Java 7 into the repos would also need to seek out and fix all the
>>>>> packages that depend on them that are broken.
>>>>
>>>> Would we actually be shipping only 7, or both 6 and 7?
>>>>
>>>
>>> This hasn't been debated yet, but I am very much in favour of having
>>> only 7 in Fedora 16.
>>>
>>> If the reason for asking was w.r.t re-builds, it is unlikely that most
>>> applications will need a rebuild -- only those using deprecated APIs
>>> (which would have been deprecated for years now) and private APIs would
>>> be affected. That would likely be a small subset.
>>
>> Have you seen the list of incompatibilities?
>>
>> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/java/javase/compatibility-417013.html
>>
>
> Thanks. I hadn't seen the full list, but I knew it'd fairly small
> given how much importance compatibility has been given in the past and
> for 7.
>
> Unfortunately it is not possible to gauge how much Fedora will be
> affected by that :/ My biggest concern would be for apps using sun.*
> APIs. As mentioned above though, it should be a small percentage.
>
> Cheers,
> Deepak

I found different warning about Java 7 changes:
http://www.lucidimagination.com/search/document/1a0d3986e48a9348/warning_index_corruption_and_crashes_in_apache_luc ene_core_apache_solr_with_java_7

Does it impact also our Java? Anyway you will need exception if you want
Java 7 as a feature for F-16.
--
Marcela Mašláňová
BaseOS team Brno
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 08-01-2011, 11:49 AM
Andrew Haley
 
Default Java 7 for Fedora 16

On 08/01/2011 11:28 AM, Marcela Mašláňová wrote:
>
> I found different warning about Java 7 changes:
> http://www.lucidimagination.com/search/document/1a0d3986e48a9348/warning_index_corruption_and_crashes_in_apache_luc ene_core_apache_solr_with_java_7

That's not a Java 7 change, it's a new VM bug. The real cause is that
optimizations used in an older VM are enabled by default. I still think
we'll have to ship 6 and 7 in parallel.

Andrew.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 11:12 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org