8359760: Remove the jdk.jsobject module #26393

kevinrushforth · 2025-07-18T16:58:14Z

This PR removes the terminally-deprecated jdk.jsobject module from the JDK. This module is now shipped with JavaFX, and has been since JavaFX 24.

The following files still reference jdk.jsobject (or the netscape.javascript package). They are not modified because these files reflect the state of earlier releases, which do have the jdk.jsobject module.

src/jdk.compiler/share/data/symbols/jdk.jsobject-9.sym.txt
src/jdk.compiler/share/data/symbols/jdk.jsobject-A.sym.txt
src/jdk.compiler/share/data/symbols/jdk.jsobject-B.sym.txt
src/jdk.compiler/share/data/symbols/jdk.jsobject-C.sym.txt
src/jdk.compiler/share/data/symbols/jdk.jsobject-E.sym.txt
src/jdk.compiler/share/data/symbols/jdk.jsobject-G.sym.txt
src/jdk.compiler/share/data/symbols/jdk.jsobject-M.sym.txt
src/jdk.compiler/share/data/symbols/jdk.jsobject-O.sym.txt
src/jdk.compiler/share/data/symbols/jdk.scripting.nashorn-8.sym.txt
src/jdk.compiler/share/data/symbols/jdk.scripting.nashorn-9.sym.txt
src/jdk.compiler/share/data/symbols/jdk.scripting.nashorn-B.sym.txt
src/jdk.compiler/share/data/symbols/jdk.scripting.nashorn-F.sym.txt
src/jdk.compiler/share/data/symbols/symbols
src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc/internal/doclets/toolkit/resources/releases/element-list-10.txt
src/jdk.javadoc/share/classes/jdk/javadoc/internal/doclets/toolkit/resources/releases/element-list-9.txt

I have run tier1, tier2, and tier3 tests, as well as local tests with JavaFX WebView.

Progress

Change must be properly reviewed (1 review required, with at least 1 Reviewer)
Change must not contain extraneous whitespace
Commit message must refer to an issue
Change requires CSR request JDK-8362628 to be approved

Issues

JDK-8359760: Remove the jdk.jsobject module (Enhancement - P4)
JDK-8362628: Remove the jdk.jsobject module (CSR)

Reviewers

Roger Riggs (@RogerRiggs - Reviewer)
Iris Clark (@irisclark - Reviewer)
Alan Bateman (@AlanBateman - Reviewer)

Reviewing

Using git

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/26393/head:pull/26393
$ git checkout pull/26393

Update a local copy of the PR:
$ git checkout pull/26393
$ git pull https://git.openjdk.org/jdk.git pull/26393/head

Using Skara CLI tools

Checkout this PR locally:
$ git pr checkout 26393

View PR using the GUI difftool:
$ git pr show -t 26393

Using diff file

Download this PR as a diff file:
https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/26393.diff

Using Webrev

Link to Webrev Comment

bridgekeeper · 2025-07-18T16:59:09Z

👋 Welcome back kcr! A progress list of the required criteria for merging this PR into master will be added to the body of your pull request. There are additional pull request commands available for use with this pull request.

openjdk · 2025-07-18T16:59:25Z

@kevinrushforth This change now passes all automated pre-integration checks.

ℹ️ This project also has non-automated pre-integration requirements. Please see the file CONTRIBUTING.md for details.

After integration, the commit message for the final commit will be:

8359760: Remove the jdk.jsobject module

Reviewed-by: rriggs, iris, alanb

You can use pull request commands such as /summary, /contributor and /issue to adjust it as needed.

At the time when this comment was updated there had been 18 new commits pushed to the master branch:

e6ebefa: 8333857: Test sun/security/ssl/SSLSessionImpl/ResumeChecksServer.java failed: Existing session was used
38cd860: 8363816: Refactor array name creation
743c821: 8362193: Re-work MacOS/AArch64 SpinPause to handle SB
... and 15 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/ac141c2fa1d818858e7a12a50837bb282282ecac...master

As there are no conflicts, your changes will automatically be rebased on top of these commits when integrating. If you prefer to avoid this automatic rebasing, please check the documentation for the /integrate command for further details.

As you do not have Committer status in this project an existing Committer must agree to sponsor your change. Possible candidates are the reviewers of this PR (@RogerRiggs, @irisclark, @AlanBateman) but any other Committer may sponsor as well.

➡️ To flag this PR as ready for integration with the above commit message, type /integrate in a new comment. (Afterwards, your sponsor types /sponsor in a new comment to perform the integration).

openjdk · 2025-07-18T16:59:58Z

@kevinrushforth The following labels will be automatically applied to this pull request:

build
core-libs
javadoc

When this pull request is ready to be reviewed, an "RFR" email will be sent to the corresponding mailing lists. If you would like to change these labels, use the /label pull request command.

kevinrushforth · 2025-07-18T17:00:30Z

/skara label client

openjdk · 2025-07-18T17:01:23Z

@kevinrushforth
The client label was successfully added.

kevinrushforth · 2025-07-22T14:57:03Z

@RogerRiggs @AlanBateman Can you review this PR to remove the jdk.jsobject module, which was deprecated for removal by PR #20555 ?

mlbridge · 2025-07-22T15:00:35Z

Webrevs

01: Full - Incremental (2858cd3e)
00: Full (e70c702d)

AlanBateman · 2025-07-22T15:06:49Z

I did a quick scan and the updates to the conf, the removal, and the test changes look okay. Happy to review the CSR when you have it ready.

RogerRiggs · 2025-07-22T15:13:44Z

test/langtools/jdk/javadoc/doclet/testModules/jdk/element-list

@@ -302,8 +302,6 @@ jdk.jshell
 jdk.jshell.execution
 jdk.jshell.spi
 jdk.jshell.tool
-module:jdk.jsobject


There is a similar pair in test/langtools/jdk/javadoc/doclet/testRecordTypes/jdk17/element-list.
Can it be removed? Unless it causes a test failure.

I wondered about that, and originally was going to remove it, but then noticed that the test in question parses the JDK 17 API docs (which does have the jdk.jsobject module).

https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/e70c702d6f864b494dc7df3eea4f1a317a3bc981/test/langtools/jdk/javadoc/doclet/testRecordTypes/TestRecordTypes.java#L55-56

private static final String externalDocs = "https://docs.oracle.com/en/java/javase/17/docs/api";

I suspect that the test will run just fine if I remove it. I don't mind either way. What would you recommend?

I ran the test and then removed those lines and the test still passed.
I'd remove them to avoiding leaving a (little) mess behind.

As expected, the above test passes fine if I remove the jsobject entries from test/langtools/jdk/javadoc/doclet/testRecordTypes/jdk17/element-list. I'll go ahead and remove them, since it seems like good cleanup.

@hns Would it be possible to confirm that it's okay to remove this from the doclet tests?

The list is used as list of external linkable modules/packages for the -linkoffline option. Since the list is for JDK 17 the entry could be left in the list, but as the test doesn't try to link to the module removing it doesn't make any difference.

Maybe my previous comment was a bit unclear. Both options are okay, leaving the entries and removing them.

Thanks. In that case, I'll stick with the current state of the PR which removes them.

kevinrushforth · 2025-07-22T18:37:21Z

I did a quick scan and the updates to the conf, the removal, and the test changes look okay. Happy to review the CSR when you have it ready.

Thanks. The CSR is now ready to review: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8362628

RogerRiggs

look good.

kevinrushforth · 2025-07-23T15:38:40Z

/integrate

openjdk · 2025-07-23T15:40:26Z

@kevinrushforth
Your change (at version 2858cd3) is now ready to be sponsored by a Committer.

irisclark · 2025-07-23T15:45:43Z

/sponsor

openjdk · 2025-07-23T15:46:50Z

Going to push as commit 594c080.
Since your change was applied there have been 18 commits pushed to the master branch:

e6ebefa: 8333857: Test sun/security/ssl/SSLSessionImpl/ResumeChecksServer.java failed: Existing session was used
38cd860: 8363816: Refactor array name creation
743c821: 8362193: Re-work MacOS/AArch64 SpinPause to handle SB
... and 15 more: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/compare/ac141c2fa1d818858e7a12a50837bb282282ecac...master

Your commit was automatically rebased without conflicts.

openjdk · 2025-07-23T15:47:03Z

@irisclark @kevinrushforth Pushed as commit 594c080.

💡 You may see a message that your pull request was closed with unmerged commits. This can be safely ignored.

8359760: Remove the jdk.jsobject module

fad709a

openjdk bot added javadoc [email protected] build [email protected] core-libs [email protected] labels Jul 18, 2025

openjdk bot added the client [email protected] label Jul 18, 2025

openjdk bot added the csr Pull request needs approved CSR before integration label Jul 18, 2025

kevinrushforth added 3 commits July 21, 2025 15:40

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into 8359760-rm-jsobject

e2cce14

Bump copyright year

69f7207

Merge remote-tracking branch 'upstream/master' into 8359760-rm-jsobject

e70c702

kevinrushforth marked this pull request as ready for review July 22, 2025 14:57

openjdk bot added the rfr Pull request is ready for review label Jul 22, 2025

RogerRiggs reviewed Jul 22, 2025

View reviewed changes

Remove jdk.jsobject from one more test

2858cd3

RogerRiggs approved these changes Jul 22, 2025

View reviewed changes

irisclark approved these changes Jul 22, 2025

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added ready Pull request is ready to be integrated and removed csr Pull request needs approved CSR before integration labels Jul 22, 2025

AlanBateman approved these changes Jul 23, 2025

View reviewed changes

openjdk bot added the sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored label Jul 23, 2025

openjdk bot added the integrated Pull request has been integrated label Jul 23, 2025

openjdk bot closed this Jul 23, 2025

openjdk bot removed ready Pull request is ready to be integrated rfr Pull request is ready for review sponsor Pull request is ready to be sponsored labels Jul 23, 2025

kevinrushforth deleted the 8359760-rm-jsobject branch July 23, 2025 15:59

8359760: Remove the jdk.jsobject module #26393

8359760: Remove the jdk.jsobject module #26393

Conversation

kevinrushforth commented Jul 18, 2025 • edited by openjdk bot Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Progress

Issues

Reviewers

Reviewing

Uh oh!

bridgekeeper bot commented Jul 18, 2025

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jul 18, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jul 18, 2025

Uh oh!

kevinrushforth commented Jul 18, 2025

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jul 18, 2025

Uh oh!

kevinrushforth commented Jul 22, 2025

Uh oh!

mlbridge bot commented Jul 22, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Webrevs

Uh oh!

AlanBateman commented Jul 22, 2025

Uh oh!

RogerRiggs Jul 22, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

kevinrushforth Jul 22, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

RogerRiggs Jul 22, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

kevinrushforth Jul 22, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

AlanBateman Jul 23, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

hns Jul 23, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

hns Jul 23, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

kevinrushforth Jul 23, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

kevinrushforth commented Jul 22, 2025

Uh oh!

RogerRiggs left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

kevinrushforth commented Jul 23, 2025

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jul 23, 2025

Uh oh!

irisclark commented Jul 23, 2025

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jul 23, 2025

Uh oh!

openjdk bot commented Jul 23, 2025

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

kevinrushforth commented Jul 18, 2025 •

edited by openjdk bot

Loading

openjdk bot commented Jul 18, 2025 •

edited

Loading

mlbridge bot commented Jul 22, 2025 •

edited

Loading

hns Jul 23, 2025 •

edited

Loading