Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #36538

Re: JDK 1.8.0_131

Path	csiph.com!3.us.feeder.erje.net!2.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!1.eu.feeder.erje.net!weretis.net!feeder4.news.weretis.net!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From	omegajunior <omegajunior@protonmail.com>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject	Re: JDK 1.8.0_131
Date	Wed, 26 Apr 2017 18:16:47 -0400 (EDT)
Organization	nntp.aioe.org
Lines	56
Message-ID	<odr68f$1mct$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References	<pcmcfc1ath4l6siqlf87ocn35hvpm11t4g@4ax.com> <odkrt7$1aub$1@gioia.aioe.org> <odkt5d$og$1@dont-email.me>
NNTP-Posting-Host	+A5aWA/Qukm4ty/5C0x8Tw.user.gioia.aioe.org
Mime-Version	1.0
Content-Type	text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding	7bit
X-Complaints-To	abuse@aioe.org
X-Notice	Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
X-Newsreader	PiaoHong.Usenet.Client.Free:1.65
Xref	csiph.com comp.lang.java.programmer:36538

Show key headers only | View raw

Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> Wrote in message:
> On 4/24/2017 8:43 AM, omegajunior wrote:
>> Roedy Green <inquiry@mindprod.com> Wrote in message:
>>> JDK 1.8.0_131 is out
>>>
>> 
>> Oh, bloody hell, what is it this time? I just got through testing
>>   all my applications with 1.8.0_121. There must be a faster
>>   way.
> 
>      To answer "What is it this time?" begin by studying the release
> notes.  Sometimes the study's answers are less than comprehensive
> (release notes can be downright coy when discussing security issues),
> but that's where you should start.
> 
>      The "faster way" is largely up to you.  Three months and a day
> intervened between 121 and 131, and if it truly takes you that long
> to test your applications I'd say your test procedures could use some
> attention.  If your applications are so voluminous and so intricate
> that they can't be re-qualified in the span of a calendar quarter
> (the typical time between Java releases, nowadays), you may need to
> adopt new strategies.  For example, you might use an every-other-
> release policy, giving you six months between test cycles.  Or you
> might leave half your apps on 121 while migrating the other half
> to 131, intending to migrate the laggards to 144 (or whatever) when
> it appears -- a sort of "leapfrog" approach in which each app gets
> migrated twice a year instead of four times.  (Important security
> fixes might require some alterations to the schedule, such as "out
> of cycle" migrations of selected vulnerable apps.)
> 
>      There is, alas, no one-size-fits all solution to the problem
> of keeping current.  Have you updated the firmware in your WiFi-
> enabled toaster oven recently?  ;)
> 
> -- 
> esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid
> Thirteen hundred sixty-seven days to go.
> 

Hah, funny. 
  
Yes, I understand the importance of staying up to date. 
  
We're managing dozens of small applications, and constantly build
 new ones. It's becoming quite time-consuming to repeat-test with
 every new java release. 
  
At some point we'll only ever be testing for regressions, and
 won't have time to develop new
solutions. 
  
Well. Maybe it's time to add some developers to our team. 
-- 


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Thread

JDK 1.8.0_131 Roedy Green <inquiry@mindprod.com> - 2017-04-18 11:23 -0700
  Re:JDK 1.8.0_131 omegajunior <omegajunior@protonmail.com> - 2017-04-24 08:43 -0400
    Re: JDK 1.8.0_131 Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2017-04-24 09:07 -0400
      Re: JDK 1.8.0_131 v_borchert@despammed.com (Volker Borchert) - 2017-04-24 18:00 +0000
      Re: JDK 1.8.0_131 omegajunior <omegajunior@protonmail.com> - 2017-04-26 18:16 -0400
    Re: JDK 1.8.0_131 Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-04-24 11:25 -0400
      Re: JDK 1.8.0_131 omegajunior <omegajunior@protonmail.com> - 2017-04-26 18:12 -0400

csiph-web