JOSM feedback on Java 7,8,9, including Jigsaw EA

Rory O'Donnell rory.odonnell at
Fri Oct 30 15:41:20 UTC 2015

On 30/10/2015 15:29, Vincent Privat wrote:
> Hi,
> Following the recent inclusion of JOSM to the Quality Outreach list by 
> the Adoption Group, we have compiled every single Java issue we have 
> encountered, and reported when it was new, for the latest versions of 
> Java, on a single page:
> We will use this page to coordinate our communication efforts with 
> you. Is it possible to add a link to it in the last column of the 
> Quality Outreach table?
Added to the wiki, thanks for logging all these issues. I suggest you 
followup with the
relevant mailing lists to get specific feedback as you have done with 

> The list currently contains 29 unresolved items and 18 resolved ones.
> I won't go through all of them in this e-mail. Ideally we'd like to 
> see all of them fixed in a future Java release but I will only focus 
> on the most important ones.
> Concerning Jigsaw:
> - We have reported 3 bugs. All made it to the public JIRA: 8138878, 
> 8140477, 8140481. The second one is a bit problematic for our tests as 
> it basically kills our Jenkins instance. I see the two other ones are 
> understood/in progress. We will do more tests after we resolve the 
> hanging problem.
> - We'd like to know if it can be expected to see the 
> package become a public JDK API, for example in 
> We currently use it to generate a self-signed 
> certificate in order to create a local https server. That's our only 
> use of private JDK API.
> Concerning Valhalla:
> - I see some discussions about building the JDK with project Valhalla. 
> Are you going to provide public Early Access builds like project Jigsaw?
> Concerning the JIRA database:
> - Is it possible to add the label "josm-found" to 
> issues 8140481, 8139659, 8034224, 7158257, 7194099 ?
> - Some issues didn't make it to the public JIRA and remained in the 
> private bug database. Can we please have more information on them (why 
> have they apparently been rejected)? The incident numbers 
> are JI-9009025, JI-9010791, JI-9009449, JI-9008003.
> - Is it expected to allow external people to have the possibility to 
> subscribe to JDK issues?
I will take a look at these and come back to you.
> Concerning our incoming migration from Java 7 to Java 8:
> - I am concerned about three issues in Java2D/AWT on Linux. We have 
> several duplicate bug reports for them: 6322854, 7172749, 8098530. Can 
> we hope for a fix in a future update of Java 8?
> Finally:
> - We had a terrible experience when trying to report a bug against 
> JAXP. We detected a severe data corruption problem in StaX when 
> dealing with Unicode SMP characters, so we reported it, including a 
> sample Java program 100% reproducible, in January 2013 (JAXP-76 on 
> <> JIRA). As no activity was visible on this 
> JIRA instance, we tried to use the standard Java bug report, three 
> times, without success, with incident numbers 2431783 
> (2013-01-23), 2627098 (2013-10-28) and 9048481 (2014-11-28), without 
> any answer. On 2014, November 29th we discovered by chance that the 
> bug had finally been detected and fixed internally, as JDK-8058175 
> (created and resolved in September 2014). We reported back to the 
> public JAXP JIRA instance, again without any answer. 6 months later we 
> finally got the ironic and laconic answer "Please report issues to the 
> OpenJDK Bug System", which was exactly was we were trying to do for 2 
> years! Can you please tell us why our bug reports were all silently 
> ignored while the bug was real, and if is it still worth reporting 
> bugs against JAXP? Thankfully we had far better experiences with other 
> components of the JDK.

I will take a look for you and see what I can find.


Rgds,Rory O'Donnell
Quality Engineering Manager
Oracle EMEA , Dublin, Ireland

More information about the jigsaw-dev mailing list