geertjan.wielenga at googlemail.com
Fri Mar 26 14:39:17 UTC 2021
I recommend you don’t do this. Don’t write to the JDK developer list about
NetBeans without interacting about that first with others on the NetBeans
dev mailing list.
You’re generating a lot of noise.
On Fri, 26 Mar 2021 at 15:14, Eric Bresie <ebresie at gmail.com> wrote:
> It is Apache Netbeans which is on the list.
> The IDE/Platform is updated/updating to newer Java it’s how to handle the
> legacy plug-ins that I’m concerned about
> Its the independent plugins which leverages pack 200 / unpack during
> plug-in install.
> Presently there is issue (1) in work for this but it didn’t seem clear to
> me at first why it didn’t handle the use case of unpacking existing pack200
> in a newer JDK environment but I’m guessing one of the pack200 forks may be
> the way forward.
> From: Alex Buckley <alex.buckley at oracle.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, March 23, 2021 12:26:08 PM
> To: Eric Bresie <ebresie at gmail.com>; jdk-dev at openjdk.java.net <
> jdk-dev at openjdk.java.net>
> Subject: Re: Unpack200 alternatives
> On 3/23/2021 5:41 AM, Eric Bresie wrote:
> > ... With the frequency of releases, that doesn’t guarantee that
> > projects will be able to migrate immediately. Migrating between JDK
> > various [presumably you meant "variations"?] on a massive project is
> > not necessarily an easy task nor is it potentially feasible when
> > working with volunteer effort ...
> Is your "massive project" listed at
> https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/quality/Quality+Outreach ?
> Can you share some of the problems migrating from JDK N to JDK N+1? We
> understand that JDK 8 to 9 (or straight to 11) can be tough, but
> migrating from JDK 15 to 16 should be straightforward.
More information about the jdk-dev