The future of OpenJDK6

[Andrew Hughes]

----- Original Message -----
> Oracle ended public updates of JDK6 at the end of last month.  Many
> people seem to have concluded that the OpenJDK6 project will
> therefore
> end at the same time.  This is incorrect: OpenJDK6 will continue, but
> will be maintained by the community outside Oracle.
> 
> This will require some infrastructure changes.  In particular,
> because
> we are to maintain OpenJDK6 outside Oracle we need a bug database to
> which we have full access.  At present, only people inside Oracle can
> create and update bug reports.  Oracle intend to rectify this
> situation sometime in the summer, but in the meantime we need
> something we can use.  I therefore propose to create an OpenJDK 6
> project on java.net and use a JIRA bug database there.  Once Oracle
> has a fully-open bug database we can transfer bugs to it.  While I'm
> aware that this is not ideal, I believe it is the only way that we
> can
> run this project independently of Oracle.
> 
> A few questions I've been asked:
> 
> * What will be the policy for future changes?
> 
> OpenJDK 6 is a legacy project.  People only use it because they want
> long-term stability and compatibility.  Therefore, only changes that
> fix significant bugs should be made.  This is not a policy change
> from
> that discussed on http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk6/
> 
> * What about security updates?
> 
> We'll back-port them as they arrive and commit them to OpenJDK 6.
> However, there may be some delay because of the effort and testing
> that back-porting requires.  Therefore, if you want the most secure
> and up-to-date version of OpenJDK, you should update to OpenJDK 7.
> We'll also fix any security bugs that are found in OpenJDK 6 alone,
> but again there may be some delay.
> 
> * What about Windows/Mac/etc builds?
> 
> I really don't know.  If the Windows/Mac/etc community want to get
> involved, then there will be updates for those platforms.  If not,
> there won't be.  It's up to them.
> 
> * How long will this project continue for?
> 
> The duration of support for OpenJDK 6 depends on how active its
> developers remain as part of the OpenJDK community.  As things stand
> today, Red Hat (my current employer) is taking the lead in supporting
> the OpenJDK 6 project.  It is conceivable that this project will be
> maintained beyond the duration of Red Hat's commitment.  That
> ultimately depends on the community.
> 
> Finally, this is a significant moment for OpenJDK.  We look forward
> to
> working with the wider community of OpenJDK 6 users and developers on
> this project.
> 
> Andrew.
> 

A couple of questions:

1.  Oracle had three main roles in relation to OpenJDK 6; acting as
gatekeeper over which patches were accepted into the repository, providing
security updates and making releases.  The third of these doesn't seem to
be addressed above.  Will new releases of OpenJDK 6 be made?  IcedTea for
OpenJDK 6 uses release tarballs as a base so, unless there are further releases,
none of the changes made upstream in OpenJDK 6 will be consumed by IcedTea
downstream.  I believe we are already overdue a new release as there
is no release of OpenJDK 6 containing the last three sets of security
updates.

2.  What many people actually see as OpenJDK 6 at present, in the form of their
GNU/Linux distribution package, is actually IcedTea for OpenJDK 6.  Unlike 7,
where the changes in IcedTea are just to make it "distro-ready" (using system
libraries, etc.), there are now so many backports and other fixes local to
IcedTea 6 that it is effectively a different beast altogether.  Will OpenJDK 6
be open to accepting some of these fixes, many of which were added to the
proprietary version of JDK 6 maintained by Oracle a long time ago, so the
two can eventually be in sync?

3.  The largest contributions to OpenJDK 6 from Red Hat have been the merges of
new versions of HotSpot, upgrading it from 11 through 14, 16 and 19, to its
current version of 20.  Given appropriate testing, is moving to a newer version
of HotSpot a possibility?  We've already started testing HotSpot 23 in IcedTea:

http://blog.fuseyism.com/index.php/2013/03/13/hotspot-23-in-icedtea-for-openjdk-6/

and this shows promise, though we would probably want to go with a later version
in OpenJDK 6 which again has a working Zero assembler port.

4.  Finally, this is just a thought, and I realise it may run contrary to your
promise of long-term stability and compatibility, but I've been giving some thought
to the long running issues we've had with javac in OpenJDK 6.  For those who are
unaware, the javac in OpenJDK 6 is not the same as in Oracle's proprietary JDK 6,
but rather an early development version of the one used in OpenJDK 7.  I've been
wondering if the best way of supporting this long-term would be to use the tools
from 7 in OpenJDK 6, with appropriate reversions to make it compatible with 6
(defaulting to 6 source/target, having builds pass the 6 TCK), rather than continuing
to maintain the hybrid we have now.  This would also mean we'd be able to benefit
more directly from any bug fixes or security updates directed at the langtools
present in 7.

In closing, I'd like to welcome this new chapter in the life of OpenJDK 6 and I hope
it is successful in continuing existing community involvement, and hopefully taking
things even further.

Thanks,
-- 
Andrew :)

Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)

PGP Key: 248BDC07 (https://keys.indymedia.org/)
Fingerprint = EC5A 1F5E C0AD 1D15 8F1F  8F91 3B96 A578 248B DC07