JEPs proposed to target JDK 9

[Mario Torre]

2014-10-31 0:02 GMT+01:00  <mark.reinhold at oracle.com>:
> 2014/10/23 3:15 -0700, mark.reinhold at oracle.com:
>> For your consideration: The following JEPs have been placed into the
>> "Proposed to Target" state by their respective owners after discussion
>> and review.
>>
>>   158: Unified JVM Logging                               http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/158
>>   211: Elide Deprecation Warnings on Import Statements   http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/211
>>   212: Resolve Lint and Doclint Warnings                 http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/212
>>   213: Milling Project Coin                              http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/213
>>   214: Remove GC Combinations Deprecated in JDK 8        http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/214
>>   216: Process Import Statements Correctly               http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/216
>>
>> Feedback is more than welcome, as are reasoned objections.  If no such
>> objections are raised in one week's time (i.e., by 2014/10/30 23:00 UTC),
>> or if they're raised and then satisfactorily answered, then per the JEP
>> 2.0 process proposal [1] I'll target these JEPs to JDK 9.
>
> Thanks to all who commented on this round.  One objection was raised,
> and satisfactorily answered.

More like just answered :) but this ship has sailed I don't think
there's much we can do about it anymore.

I understand that the JCP *is* the ultimate authority and the place
where those discussion should take place. I understand it, appreciate
it and fully endorse it of course. I would have expected though that
changes that may be relevant to everybody like breaking backward
compatibility (like the change we questioned) should have wider
exposure than just a summary mail at the end of the cycle, where
there's no discussion that can be done anymore.

The main problem is that even if there are objection, they just won't
count, decision had been made, the train is gone, the consensus in the
group has been reached, so anything we may say it's just not "adding
any new information".

Of course, as said the JCP is the place to go, if we want our voice
heard this is where it should be. But maybe we should have some digest
of what's going on in the JCP that affect what's going on here, so
that people don't loose track, the way it works now is totally
confusing to be honest.

> Hearing no further objections, I've targeted all these JEPs to JDK 9.

Sure, don't misunderstand me and my criticism please, there's lot of
good stuff going on here, so cheers!

Mario
-- 
pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF
Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA  FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF

Java Champion - Blog: http://neugens.wordpress.com - Twitter: @neugens
Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/
OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/

Please, support open standards:
http://endsoftpatents.org/