RFR(JAXP): 8165784: Deprecate the internal Catalog API in JDK 9
daniel.fuchs at oracle.com
Wed Sep 14 19:25:34 UTC 2016
On 14/09/16 20:09, Joe Wang wrote:
> Hi Daniel, Roger,
> Thanks for the review!
> The webrev is updated as we discussed. The deprecation message is in the
> main interface classes but stresses that the entire application under
> the resolver package and the util class (XMLCatalogResolver.java) are
> deprecated and subject to removal in a future release.
This looks good to me Joe!
Thanks for the detailed explanations.
> As you noted, there's an internal usage in jaxws/jaxb. Aleksej and I
> have worked together to get the standalone updated with the new Catalog
> API. The JDK integration will happen soon.
> The deprecation is not technically necessary for an internal API. Even
> without the JDK 9 encapsulation, the compiler has always produced a
> warning that the internal API is subject to change/removal, and should
> not be directly referenced. Unfortunately, this particular one is in a
> awkward situation. It was integrated along with jaxp from the Apache
> library without a public API. Internal and external users are therefore
> taken it as if it's okay to use. The encapsulation could be viewed
> similarly as the existing compiler warning. The deprecation message
> therefore serves as an enforcement that it is indeed in the plan to be
> On 9/14/16, 10:15 AM, Roger Riggs wrote:
>> I don't see there is much point in deprecating an API that is not
>> It doesn't show up in the javadoc and the compiler overrides with
>> -addexports would already be needed.
>> The internal uses should be updated but that should not be a reason to
>> put off warning other
>> consumers that a transition to another API is needed. One of the
>> purposes of @deprecated is to start
>> a very slow/long process moving.
>> $.02, Roger
>> On 9/14/2016 5:11 AM, Daniel Fuchs wrote:
>>> Hi Joe,
>>> As much as I would like to support removing obsolete
>>> classes, I wonder if the forRemoval=true is a bit
>>> I see that for instance,
>>> seems to be still used at many places in our code base.
>>> It would be more convincing if we could first make our
>>> own codebase stop using these classes: then we could
>>> be confident that forRemoval=true is the better choice!
>>> best regards,
>>> -- daniel
>>> On 14/09/16 05:48, Joe Wang wrote:
>>>> Please review the deprecation of the internal Catalog API.
>>>> JBS: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8165784
>>>> webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~joehw/jdk9/8165784/webrev/
More information about the core-libs-dev