Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #36639

Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no

From Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk>
Newsgroups comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no
Date 2017-05-16 20:48 -0400
Organization Aioe.org NNTP Server
Message-ID <ofg6la$d4j$1@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink)
References (10 earlier) <21ebb136-a9b3-45d0-a8d2-36f4cc89b991@googlegroups.com> <59138555$0$24634$e4fe514c@newszilla.xs4all.nl> <ofatlg$1r7b$1@gioia.aioe.org> <ofddgo$10l$1@gioia.aioe.org> <offo1l$lul$1@news.albasani.net>

Show all headers | View raw


On 5/16/2017 4:39 PM, Sebastian wrote:
> Am 16.05.2017 um 01:27 schrieb Arne Vajhøj:
>> Note though that JSR 376 (module system) public review
>> was rejected by JCP EC.
>>
>> 13 NO votes (IBM, Redhat, Eclipse etc.)
>> 10 YES votes (Oracle, Azul etc.)
>>
>> But it may not be dead yet as the comments from some of the
>> NO voters sort of points towards a resolution.
>>
> [comments snipped]
>
> The comments by the nay-sayers broadly address the following topics:
> •    module isolation and dynamic modules
> •    cyclic dependencies
> •    reflection
> •    automatic modules
> •    consensus in the EG
>
> The time period for a revised spec is just too short to do anything
> about the first point. Oracle will not (and should not, in my opinion)
> change its stance with respect to the second and third point. Regarding
> automatic modules, in addition to what has been mentioned there is now
> also the possibility to specify in the module name in the Manifest.

Time is short. Unless they decide to postpone Java 9 a few months.

> Consensus there will be not, because no one is going to convince Red Hat
> (and probably also not IBM).

It will be very hard to sell this to the OSGi guys.

> So the remaining nay-sayers will have to consider whether their
> objections justify basically killing off Java 9. My guess is most will
> find that upholding the No vote would be too detrimental to the Java
> ecosystem as a whole, and that consequently the JSR will get bthe
> required two-thirds majority at the final vote without seeing much change.

I think Oracle can do a lot by recognize the disagreements and
use more carrot than stick.

Based on the comments it sounds like they are doing just that.

Arne

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Chris Riesbeck <Chris.Riesbeck@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 12:25 -0500
  Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-01 13:43 -0400
    Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 11:14 -0700
      Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-01 14:33 -0400
        Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 11:53 -0700
          Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-01 15:10 -0400
            Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 12:53 -0700
              Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-01 16:06 -0400
          Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Eric Sosman <esosman@comcast-dot-net.invalid> - 2017-05-01 16:00 -0400
            Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-01 16:14 -0400
  Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-01 15:59 -0400
  Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2017-05-01 22:01 +0200
    Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-01 16:09 -0400
      Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2017-05-01 23:17 +0200
        Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-01 18:35 -0400
          Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2017-05-02 21:42 +0200
            Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-02 16:18 -0400
              Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2017-05-02 22:45 +0200
                Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-02 17:43 -0400
                Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-02 22:57 -0400
                Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no lewbloch@gmail.com - 2017-05-10 12:42 -0700
                Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Eric Douglas <e.d.programmer@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 13:12 -0700
                Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Silvio <silvio@internet.com> - 2017-05-10 23:25 +0200
                Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-14 20:44 -0400
                Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-15 19:27 -0400
                Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Sebastian <nowhere@nirvana.org> - 2017-05-16 22:39 +0200
                Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-16 20:48 -0400
                Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-07-21 19:45 -0400
              Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no v_borchert@despammed.com (Volker Borchert) - 2017-05-02 23:09 +0000
                Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-02 22:45 -0400
  Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no lewbloch@gmail.com - 2017-05-02 02:53 -0700
    Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-02 16:24 -0400
      Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Gene Wirchenko <genew@telus.net> - 2017-05-02 14:27 -0700
        Re: Jigsaw: RedHat and IBM say no Arne Vajhøj <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2017-05-02 17:47 -0400

csiph-web