Re: 2.7.2 for the New Year?

On Tue, Jan 8, 2019 at 12:41 PM James Mudd <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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 <[email protected]> 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
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Jython-dev mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev
>>
>

_______________________________________________
Jython-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jython-dev