Menu
▾
▴
Re: [Jython-dev] 2.7.2 for the New Year?
|
From: Jim B. <jim...@py...> - 2019-01-08 21:11:57
|
On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 12:41 PM James Mudd <jam...@gm...> wrote: > I agree a 2.7.2 release as soon as possible would be great. Sorry I > haven't done much work on Jython since the website but hopefully have a > look at the remaining issues soon. > Thanks for that work on the website! Hopefully jython.org will point at https://jython.github.io/ soon! > > My opinion on Java support would be to try for 8 and 11. Is there is a > compelling reason maintain 7 support? Dropping 7 would be nice for java > syntax and might allow some issue to be looked at e.g. > http://bugs.jython.org/issue2695, on the other hand we still have 7 > working now so maybe its worth keeping for this release? Also I think we > should be careful to say which we actually support vs which work. I think > making Jython run on 7,8,9,10 and 11 is possible but saying only 8 and 11 > are officially supported makes things a bit easier going forward? > Agreed about dropping support for Java 7. In Jython, we have only attempted to support Java releases that are supported for the community. (Oracle does offer commercial support for Java 6 and Java 7, but we are not part of that program; we don't have access to their releases.) It's really not feasible for us to do otherwise: the ecosystem moves on. However, I wouldn't now move to Java 8 syntax/functionality for 2.7.2, it's obviously too late in the dev process. But for 2.7.3 and later, certainly. We would also gain functionality useful for implementing Jython, including MethodHandle and CallSite. - Jim > I haven't followed the Gradle discussion, so based on nothing here are my > opinions. Gradle is probably the nicest Java build system available at the > moment (i.e its what I would use given free choice). I think the real gain > would be to produce a smaller jar without the bundled dependencies (but > with a POM) so that people could integrate jython into other products more > easily where they have their own dependencies to worry about. The current > build.gradle looks really nice! I will have a play with it. A related issue > I mean to look at is OSGi support > https://github.com/jythontools/jython/issues/79 I think adding some > manifest header would be enough to make a start on this so I would like to > try and do that for this release. > > Here is the current master regtest result on my system (Linux, Oracle Java > 11.0.1): > [exec] 379 tests OK. > [exec] 2 tests skipped: > [exec] test_codecmaps_hk test_curses > [exec] 3 tests failed: > [exec] test_import_jy test_signal test_socket > [exec] 3 fails unexpected: > [exec] test_import_jy test_signal test_socket > > So its pretty close. > > Thanks for all the hard work already done towards 2.7.2 > > James > > On Tue, 8 Jan 2019 at 09:19, Jeff Allen <ja...@fa...> wrote: > >> Thanks Jim. >> >> 1. It would be worth deciding whether we support Java 7. It was sensible >> a year ago, I think, especially given that ANTLR produced horrible >> (although apparently harmless) stack dumps on Java 8+: it didn't feel safe >> to build a release other than on 7, but that's now fixed. (Java 9 and 10 >> went by quickly, didn't they? I suppose this moves our target :( to 7/8 >> &11.) >> >> 2. Darn, I guess I missed the import. It came and went a few times in the >> edit. Normally I let the IDE sort this out last thing, but hold off with >> old code as it creates noise in the change set. Easily fixed. >> >> 3. I have done a partial job on this, only scanning some modules, and >> intend to revisit. I do not think this explains a problem with Pattern. >> >> 4. A reflective access warning only occur if you are foolish enough to >> ask for a real fd. I regard this as unavoidable (but we now avoid doing it >> ourselves). >> >> 5. Signals: not something I understand very well at present. >> >> Let's not forget ski8pped tests. However, each should have an issue, and >> that issue may not be in this milestone. >> >> I wonder if Adam's extra failing tests might be to do with localisation? >> Jeff Allen >> >> On 08/01/2019 06:12, Jim Baker wrote: >> >> I agree with "better now (not perfect)"! Some more observations: >> >> 1. Java 9 is no longer supported, only Java 8 and Java 11, both of which >> are under long term support. >> 2. Java 11 removes javax.xml.bind, which we import from >> DatatypeConverter; fortunately we don't actually use! Commenting out two >> lines of source means trunk builds just fine on Java 11. >> 3. The key change that prevented Java 9 support from running, namely >> introspecting Java packages without using the rt.jar, now mostly works. In >> the regrtest, it still fails with importing Pattern from java.util.regex, >> not certain why; the two other imports tested in import_star_from_java.py >> work fine. >> 4. We do have some illegal access warnings from jnr.posix in terms of >> reflected fields, which we will have to look into at some point. Of course, >> this is just the usual encapsulation of Java that Java 9 introduced. >> 5. The other failing test in test_signal when run on JDK 11 is related to >> the change over to how signals are exposed. >> >> To summarize: >> >> [exec] 380 tests OK. >> [exec] 2 tests skipped: >> [exec] test_codecmaps_hk test_curses >> [exec] 2 tests failed: >> [exec] test_import_jy test_signal >> [exec] 2 fails unexpected: >> [exec] test_import_jy test_signal >> [exec] Result: 1 >> >> So this looks very close to me! >> >> Lots of incredibly hard work has gone into 2.7.2, it's time to get it out >> there. >> >> - Jim >> >> On Mon, Jan 7, 2019 at 1:19 PM Jeff Allen <ja...@fa...> wrote: >> >>> Thanks Adam. Mainly I thought we couldn't ship in such a shabby state on >>> Java 9. Better now (not perfect). -- J. >>> >>> Jeff Allen >>> >>> On 07/01/2019 10:55, Adam Burke wrote: >>> >>> I just checked out out the head for the first time in a while and >>> regrtest is green for me under Windows and Java 8. Great to see. >>> >>> <0.02 put in jar> >>> >>> From my (front-row?) spectator seat, I think more frequent patch >>> releases wouldn't hurt. It's been a fair while since 2.7.1. If the tests >>> are green, bugs have been fixed, and more stuff works in 2.7.2 than 2.7.1, >>> I would vote to ship. >>> >>> If the gradle stuff is working well enough to produce a jar, it could be >>> included and marked experimental? I'm sure it would be useful to projects >>> with dependencies on jython from maven or gradle projects. >>> >>> Obviously it would be good to announce the beta on the website though. >>> >>> Cheers >>> Adam >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Jython-dev mailing list >>> Jyt...@li... >>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Jython-dev mailing list >> Jyt...@li... >> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev >> > |
