IcedTeaWeb Roadmap

[Martijn Verburg]

One quick addition to this is that we (AdoptOpenJDK) intend to release
1.8.1 (which we will then offer as an option in our installers) until such
time a 2.0.0 release is mase.


Cheers,
Martijn


On Thu, 18 Apr 2019 at 14:23, Jiri Vanek <jvanek at redhat.com> wrote:

>  Hello!
>
> On 4/18/19 10:24 AM, Laurent Bourgès wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Since ITW 1.7 & 1.8 have been publicly released and the icedtea-web
> repository migrated to
> > AdoptOpenJDK github, I wonder what is the current roadmap for IcedTeaWeb
> maintenance (1.8 branch)
>
> 1.8 should remain same. Backports will go in, and its separate release
> will happen from time to time
> (I would say currently is the timeto do so, but no one seems to be
> interested)
>
> I should be responsible for the releases, and will publish them on github,
> or still on
> classpath.org. Also I wills send announcement.
>
> > and its future 1.9...
>
> 2.0 :)
> >
> > Could you publicly explain what are the current plans on:
> > - AdoptOpenJDK integration of ITW package into Public OpenJDK binary
> builds ?
>
> I keep saying, that integration of ITW into any JDK is bad idea, however
> it is easy to make ITW
> embeddable in such way. Currently such a patch is not in place. (but
> isactlually oneliner searching
> first for its own jdk, or better third mode next to DISTRIBUTION and
> BUNDLED - EMBEDDED)
>
> If anybody will do that, I'm not against.  Also if any JDK vendor will
> bundle ITW, its theirs choice.
>
> > - provide an itw installer on top of any OpenJDK install ?
>
> I wish to keep maintaining (with help of windows itw community) ITW
> standalone installer and zips.
> Similarly I wish to keep ITW as linux-distribution friendly.
>
> > - ITW code evolution in the karakun's OpenWebStart project ?
>
> I believe karakun  have good intentions with ITW. They have several
> full-timers on it, thus they can
> afford to do breaking changes, which, if done in previous model, could
> remain unfinished for long
> time. Also they can help to fix long standing hard bugs like  iLo console
> or so.
>
> All changes are going through PR. Anybody can stop any PR at any time. If
> you disagree with some
> evolution,  dont hesitate to rebuke.
> >
> > I noticed the current github head branch contains only java code now.
> Where is the code providing
> > launchers (shell & rust) ?
>
> Current github have both java and shell and rust codebase. Java is built
> by maven. The shells and
> rusts are currently "just  there" but I'm already working on integrate
> them with current maven build.
>
> Not much willchane at the end. Maven is generating jars. The shell and
> rust laucnhers must put them
> to classpath, in fboth standalone and distribution-like way. I'm going to
> keep that alive. All
> dsitros and community standalon builds are depnding on those launchers.
> They are not going to be
> left behind (unless somebody provides better ones)
>
> >  How is made the packaging now ?
>
>
> Currently there is nothing. On my machine PR is slowly rising which will
> have script, which will
> prepare distribution. I thougth it will be one afternoon work but I
> overcalcualted quite a lot. I
> hope to have it finished for rust in end of net week, shell launchers to
> follow.
>
>
> I'm going to fix the outstanding issues you did not like so much - mainly
> only one libdir with all
> jars for portable build, so quite a simplification for rust and shell
> portable tarballs/msi.
>
>
>
> Hope that explains. Dont hesitate to shout if you disagree or if you wish
> to do something differently.
>
>
> J.
>
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Laurent Bourges
>
>
> --
> Jiri Vanek
> Senior QE engineer, OpenJDK QE lead, Mgr.
> Red Hat Czech
> jvanek at redhat.com    M: +420775390109
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/distro-pkg-dev/attachments/20190418/45433c70/attachment.html>