JDK 9 ea 99 java.version

Alan Bateman Alan.Bateman at oracle.com
Sun Jan 3 08:09:10 UTC 2016

On 02/01/2016 20:32, John Patrick wrote:
> evening,
> Does anyone know how to override the java.version field?
> Wanting to help out with getting JDK 9 ready, using it and building 
> projects with it.
> Most patches I've submitted so far as simply bumping which is the min 
> java version being used from 1.5 to 1.6.
> One issue that I can't figure a work around for java.version. I'm 
> getting the following error from maven-javadoc-plugin.
> [WARNING] Unable to find the javadoc version: Unrecognized version of 
> Javadoc: 'java version "9-ea"
> Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment (build 
> 9-ea+99-2015-12-23-184955.javare.4146.nc 
> <http://99-2015-12-23-184955.javare.4146.nc>)
> Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM (build 
> 9-ea+99-2015-12-23-184955.javare.4146.nc 
> <http://99-2015-12-23-184955.javare.4146.nc>, mixed mode)
> ' near index 37
> (?s).*?([0-9]+\.[0-9]+)(\.([0-9]+))?.*
>                                      ^
> [WARNING] Using the Java the version instead of, i.e. 0.0
> [WARNING] -quiet option is not supported on Java version < 1.4. Ignore 
> this option.
> My question is should maven and every other project accept 9-ea as a 
> valid java.version string, or could build 100 plus tweak the 
> java.version string to something else that is considered valid.
In a recent mail to jigsaw-dev [1], Robert Scholte mentioned that the 
new version-string scheme may be problematic for some Maven plugins. He 
mentions the plexus-archiver specifically and that seems to have a patch 
already. If the maven-javadoc-plugin needs updates too then it's best to 
get a bug submitted so that it's on someone's radar.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/quality-discuss/attachments/20160103/eec57822/attachment.html>

More information about the quality-discuss mailing list