JEP 411, removal of finalizers, a path forward.

mark.reinhold at mark.reinhold at
Wed Aug 4 17:14:10 UTC 2021

2021/8/3 9:40:58 -0700, sean.mullan at
> On 8/2/21 8:28 PM, Peter Firmstone wrote:
>> ...
>> Having established that OpenJDK is not yet willing to compromise, I have
>> been attempting to create an authorization layer using Agents, so that I
>> can restore perimeter security following the removal of SM and support
>> future versions of Java. It is my hope that either I will be
>> successful in recreating an authorization layer, or that enough people
>> come forward and OpenJDK decides there are enough affected developers to
>> find a compromise that either makes migration practical, or less expensive.
> You may have some interesting ideas, but in my opinion you have not 
> presented them in a clear and easily digestible manner, and your long 
> emails are time consuming to read, repetitive and often diverge into 
> rants. (Keep in mind there are many people on the jdk-dev alias, and a 
> lot of them may not care about this topic).

Agreed.  Over a thousand people are subscribed to the jdk-dev list,
which is meant for discussion of topics of the broadest interest.

I suspect that many people would appreciate it if future discussions
of this topic were confined to the security-dev list.

>                                             It is to the point where I 
> only skim your emails quickly. I would take the time to write up your 
> ideas in an external place. It may not go anywhere, but at least you 
> would have a single place where your proposal, experiments, etc are 
> documented.

A fine suggestion.

- Mark

More information about the jdk-dev mailing list