Proposed schedule change for JDK 9

[Jeremy Manson]

Thanks to everyone who responded.  Obviously, none of our JEPs would end up
driving the platform, so we'll proceed and see what happens.

Jeremy

On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 8:49 AM, <mark.reinhold at oracle.com> wrote:

> 2015/12/1 3:20 -0800, jeremymanson at google.com:
> > What constitutes a reasonable JEP in this time frame?  Is it basically
> > defined as one that doesn't add undue risk to the overall release?
>
> Yes.  It's better to reserve room for informed judgement on individual
> JEPs than try to come up with a uniform set of rules for all JEPs.
>
> > I have no particular concerns about the timeline for Jigsaw features,
> but I
> > do have concerns about the velocity of OpenJDK development.  If larger
> JEPs
> > are not going to be able to target Java 9, and the releases are being put
> > on hold for 6 months, will this timeline shift have an effect on when the
> > Mercurial repos are made available for JDK10?
>
> (You mean "JDK 10", with a space after the "K".)
>
> >                                                Will larger JEPs be able
> to
> > target Java 10 earlier?
>
> I expect that the JDK 10 forests will open six months later than they
> otherwise would have.
>
> > We have a couple of JEPs that we've been meaning to write, but we felt
> like
> > we missed the Java 9 deadline, so the answer to this will inform our 2016
> > plans.
>
> I think that what Volker said is apt here.  Large projects with broad
> impact such as Lambda and Jigsaw generally wind up driving a particular
> release.  Most JEPs, however, are not that large, and the best strategy
> is to move them through the process as soon as they're ready so that
> they can be proposed to target the next appropriate release.
>
> > Also, will this affect the flexibility in backporting new features to
> > JDK8?
>
> That will be up to those working on the JDK 8 Updates Project.
>
> - Mark
>