+1 from me too. Jumping to Java 8 is way more valuable. Alexander Kurtakov Red Hat Eclipse team ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mikolaj Izdebski" <mizdebsk@xxxxxxxxxx> > To: "Fedora Java Development List" <java-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Thursday, February 20, 2014 8:09:00 PM > Subject: Javadoc packages > > We'll have to move to Java 8 in Fedora sooner or later. I did some > testing of Maven and Ant stacks regards that and most of things seem > to be working well, except for javadoc. > > Java 8 has a very strict parser for javadocs, and any error or nuisance > causes build failure -- almost all packages fail to build with Java 8 > due to various errors in javadocs. > > In some cases we can probably fix javadoc problems and forward patches > upstream, but we have many legacy packages for which we can't push any > patches upstream. I don't see how in reality we can fix all packages > we have. The only good solution I can think of is disabling javadocs. > > My proposal is making javadoc subpackages optional, which means that > for some Java packages they could be disabled depending on maintainer > decision. Legacy packages with dead upstreams would be able to > disable javadocs (no one should try to develop anything depending on > such packages, so that's perfectly OK IMO). For packages which have > active upstreams we can fix javadocs and forward patches, or disable > javadoc packages, report the problem upstream and wait for them to fix > it. > > The main reasons for making javadoc optional are: > > 1. Java 8 problems, as explained above. > > 2. Storage. I took a typical set of 265 Java source packages. When > all binary RPMs were installed they took about 1.5 GB of storage. > Javadocs themselves take 1.3 GB, everything else is just around 250 MB. > > 3. Build time. Javadoc generation usually takes more time than > compilation. Javadoc tool needs a lot of memory, an can be very slow, > especially on ARM or POWER where there is no JIT. There are cases > where javadoc generation accounts for more than 90 % of build time. > > I am looking to hear your opinion on this matter (positive or negative) > and if there is some positive feedback then I would like to submit this > proposal as a system-wide change for Fedora 21. > > -- > Mikolaj Izdebski > -- > java-devel mailing list > java-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel -- java-devel mailing list java-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/java-devel