New candidate JEP: 335: Deprecate the Nashorn JavaScript Engine (original) (raw)

Jim Laskey james.laskey at oracle.com
Mon Jun 18 15:10:37 UTC 2018

I think this is an excellent outcome. Thank you Attila.

I will revise JEP 335 accordingly.

Cheers,

— Jim

On Jun 18, 2018, at 12:07 PM, mark.reinhold at oracle.com wrote:

2018/6/15 4:40:47 -0700, Attila Szegedi <szegedia at gmail.com>: On 2018. Jun 12., at 16:55, mark.reinhold at oracle.com wrote:

[…] If a set of credible developers expresses a clear desire to maintain Nashorn after JDK 11 then all of us who work on this code base will find a way to make that happen. Maybe Nashorn stays in the JDK, or maybe it’s removed from the JDK and maintained in some other OpenJDK Project and published to Maven Central, or maybe some completely different approach is taken. Exactly what happens depends, mostly, on who shows up. So ... any takers? I have expressed previously that I am willing to keep maintaining Dynalink, and that I believe it needs to stay in the JDK in order to be effective. John Rose seemed to agree in an earlier reply in this thread. As the creator of Dynalink you’re obviously qualified to take this on, so thanks for volunteering! I agree that much of Dynalink’s value rests in its continued availability in the JDK. Jim -- what do you think? It’d be great if we could conceptually unbundle Dynalink from Nashorn for the purpose of this discussion. (For historical reasons, its source code is colocated with Nashorn's, but it can be easily moved elsewhere and there’s no technical reason for keeping it there.) As Alan noted, Dynalink is already in its own module, so this isn’t an issue. - Mark

More information about the jdk-dev mailing list