Date: Sun, 11 Aug 2019 10:25:42 +0200 From: Michael Osipov <1983-01-06@gmx.net> To: Greg Lewis <glewis@eyesbeyond.com> Cc: java@freebsd.org Subject: Re: RFC: Future of java/openjdk6 and java/openjdk7 Message-ID: <ad2fd1ef-8fc4-38e1-736e-b9385aa43402@gmx.net> In-Reply-To: <20190810205358.GA38888@misty.eyesbeyond.com> References: <20190802014149.GA59118@misty.eyesbeyond.com> <935ee70b-0f6e-1813-25c3-ced836143e32@gmx.net> <20190810183901.GA76800@misty.eyesbeyond.com> <22887160-4c94-9907-84f3-23fff562c239@gmx.net> <20190810193529.GA38493@misty.eyesbeyond.com> <d8036483-9b1f-c54b-6e7d-4821c4a93afd@gmx.net> <20190810205358.GA38888@misty.eyesbeyond.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Am 2019-08-10 um 22:53 schrieb Greg Lewis: > On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 09:42:35PM +0200, Michael Osipov wrote: >> Am 2019-08-10 um 21:35 schrieb Greg Lewis: >>> On Sat, Aug 10, 2019 at 08:52:26PM +0200, Michael Osipov wrote: >>>> Am 2019-08-10 um 20:39 schrieb Greg Lewis: >>>>> On Fri, Aug 02, 2019 at 08:07:39AM +0200, Michael Osipov wrote: >>>>>> Am 2019-08-02 um 03:41 schrieb Greg Lewis: >>>>>>> Oracle ended official releases of JDK 7 in April of 2015, and JDK = 6 even >>>>>>> earlier. In the FreeBSD ports collection both java/openjdk6 and >>>>>>> java/openjdk7 have fallen out of maintenance and are considerably = behind >>>>>>> in terms of updates (which likely include fixes for security >>>>>>> vulnerabilities). In addition, openjdk6 will soon become unbuilda= ble in >>>>>>> FreeBSD 12-STABLE based on >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://bugs.freebsd.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=3D234792 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> With OpenJDK 8 having been the default JDK for a number of years n= ow, >>>>>>> OpenJDK 11 and 12 both being available (and soon 13) I would sugge= st >>>>>>> that both openjdk6 and openjdk7 be removed, along with any ports >>>>>>> depending explicitly on them(*) which are unable to be updated to = use a >>>>>>> newer version. >>>>>> >>>>>> Being an Apache Maven PMC member and a happy FreeBSD user, we guara= ntee >>>>>> that the entire Maven stack runs on top of Java 7+, so I run all >>>>>> integration tests for all components I change on a regular basis on >>>>>> several BSD boxes (home, work) to test compat outside of the monoto= nic >>>>>> Windows/Linux world. >>>>>> >>>>>> Just because Oracle does not provide any binary packages for Java 7= it >>>>>> does not meean that it is not supported. There are a lot of vendors >>>>>> still providing Java 7 packages, e.g, Azul Systems, RHEL, HPE for H= P-UX >>>>>> (Java SE 7 is supported till July 2022 and Java SE 8 is supported t= ill >>>>>> March 2025) and likely others. >>>>> >>>>> Given this is the only response so far, I assume all are comfortable= with >>>>> removing openjdk6 and I'm going to go ahead with that once the ports= that >>>>> need upgrading have done so. >>>>> >>>>> With openjdk7, removing the port will not force you to remove the pa= ckage >>>>> from your system. I still have some older JDK ports on my desktop e= ven >>>>> though they've been removed from the ports tree. The problem with l= eaving >>>>> it in the tree is that it has security vulnerabilities with the curr= ent >>>>> version and no one has volunteered to update it to the latest versio= n. >>>>> >>>>> My question then is whether that would work. You leave the port on = your >>>>> machine and/or build a local package of it prior to removal. That s= hould >>>>> be sufficient to use it for the lifecycle of the current FreeBSD rel= ease >>>>> and further without leaving a vulnerable port in the ports tree. >>>> >>>> Well, I am not a huge fan of this because I cannot reproduce the buil= d >>>> at any time -- making an OSS component virtually useless. I don't wan= t >>>> to be dependent on others to produce it. I have gone through this wit= h >>>> the "HP-UX Porting and Archive Centre" and abandoned all packages fro= m >>>> them because they never brought there changes upstream and I was not >>>> really able to reproduce their builds. >>>> >>>> To make a long story short, if you want to cut OpenJDK 7, perform a >>>> final update, announce the port as deprecated and remove it at some >>>> point. That would be fair deal. OpenJDK 6 is obsolete. >>> >>> To reiterate, I am not planning on spending any time on openjdk7 since= it >>> has been EoL for so long. >> >> Where is this EOL? I see regular changes here: >> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7u/jdk7u/ > > The last public release of Java 7 was April 2015 (GA was July 2011). Fr= om > the main Oracle Java SE page: > > "Updates for Java SE 7 released after April 2015 are only available to O= racle Customers through My Oracle Support (requires support login)." > > Given that there are multiple types of support, I should have clarified > that I was referring to the end of public updates. There are Oracle > customers that are continuing to purchase this support, so that is why > there continue to be updates to the repository. > > However, even if there are updates to the repository, there is a > maintenance burden to supporting openjdk7 within the ports tree. Given > that no one is funding work to update openjdk7, I have to then make > a decision about whether I would like to spend volunteer time on it. > My answer to that has to fit in with the answers to questions like: > > "Would most FreeBSD users prefer that time is spent to make sure they ge= t access to the newest versions when they are released or would they prefe= r that time is spent on openjdk7?" > > This is particularly relevant given the six month release cadence that J= ava has > adopted. There are no longer years between releases and keeping up to d= ate > with the release schedule is now something that requires significant and > continuous time investment. > > "Would most FreeBSD users prefer that time is spent on fixing bugs in ne= wer versions of Java or would they prefer that time is spent on openjdk7?" > > There are crash reports against openjdk8 and openjdk11 in the bugs > database that require in depth analysis and work. Given that I believe = far > more people are running production applications on these two versions, t= he > precedence there is higher for me. > > "Would most FreeBSD users and developers prefer time is spent on improvi= ng other aspects of Java support in FreeBSD (e.g. adding ports for more co= mmon Java applications or development libraries, making it fit into the cu= rrent USES scheme, rethinking javavmwrapper, etc.) or would they prefer th= at time is spent on openjdk7?" > > Again, to me openjdk7 loses out here in regards to other enhancements fo= r > making Java a better supported language on FreeBSD. The question has > already been asked about removing USE_JAVA and getting it working with a > standard USES clause. Most other languages already support that. Suppo= rt > for powerpc64 and aarch64 still needs to be finalised as well. > > "How many versions does it make sense to have in the FreeBSD ports tree = for Java, since each of them requires support and maintenance?" > > Currently we have versions of 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12. 13 will be he= re > next month. If I look at the ports tree in general, most languages supp= ort > 3-4 versions. There are a few exceptions, but the median appears to be > 3 or 4. So if we want to trim the number of Java versions down to > something more manageable, some of them have to go. 6, 7, 9, and 10 are > all candidates for being trimmed. Removing all of them gets us down to > 8, 11, 12. With 13 to land in a month that will put us at 4 supported > versions. > > For me, the answer to all those questions leads me to the conclusion tha= t > I won't be spending volunteer time on openjdk7 other than to remove it. = If > someone else wants to keep it going, I'll support them by reviewing and > commiting updates. Greg, I really appreciate your effort and do not have counter arguments because anything you write is true. If I look at this list [1] it must be stripped down. Additionally, two points require attention: * The entire limited-resources-issue must be brought up to the foundation to act accordingly * All of the changes in battleblow/openjdk*u must brought upstream I might chime in some points you mentioned above because I care about some things. Regards, Michael [1] https://www.freshports.org/search.php?query=3Djdk&search=3Dgo&num=3D10&sty= pe=3Dname&method=3Dmatch&deleted=3Dexcludedeleted&start=3D1&casesensitivit= y=3Dcaseinsensitive&page=3D2
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?ad2fd1ef-8fc4-38e1-736e-b9385aa43402>