portal entry

Thank you for the update!

Comment by WilzDezign

Great news!

Comment by Michael Thomas

Thank you Rakshith and the Adobe CF team, this is the best possible outcome.  It's also good news that you'll be making CF 2016 compatible with Java 11 too. Do you recommend customers to upgrade to Java 11 and what are the key benefits please? (Presumably an upgrade guide will be provided with the next CF update?) Thanks again.

Comment by Gary Fenton

Rakshith: Thanks for the update on this. To be completely clear, does this also mean that use of Oracle's Java SE 8 and 11 in production environments, when used with Adobe ColdFusion, is allowed without the Adobe customer purchasing a separate license from Oracle for that Java use?

Comment by Ron.Stewart

This is good news.  Thank you Adobe.

Comment by Miguel Fernandez

Great news Rakshith and Team! I do have one question, once the Java 8 release ends public updates (after January 2019), how does a ColdFusion customer download them? For Java 7 and below the <em>non-public</em> updates are only avaliable if you login to Oracle to download them.

Comment by Peter Freitag

Great news Rakshith! Will there be a ColdFusion portal for getting the latest Java SE / JDK LTS versions from Adobe?

Comment by jbrock777

This is good to hear, I am sure many people were worried in limbo and were awaiting this announcement before making decisions.

Comment by Tyler Clendenin

Yes, we will soon announce the portal details where you can download Java SE versions that can be used with ColdFusion.

Comment by Rakshith Naresh

Pete, we will make available all the subsequent updates ,post the end of public updates, to ColdFusion customers.

Comment by Rakshith Naresh

Absolutely, Ron!

Comment by Rakshith Naresh

Gary, I recommend moving to Java 11 as it is the latest LTS release from Oracle. We will communicate the benefits in our tech note associated with the Java 11 support update.

Comment by Rakshith Naresh

Yep, really wonderful news to hear--and folks should read the comments here, which make some things more clear: that we will not need to purchase from Oracle either support for updates to Oracle Java 8 (which will no longer be free publicly after this month), nor to license Oracle Java 11 in production (also not free otherwise). Some may not quite see this as what Rakshith's is saying, as he says that we who are using CF would be  "supported by Adobe directly" to get Java 8 updates and use Java 11 . That phrasing left questions, and Rakshith clarified them in answers/comments here. I have also updated <a href="https://www.carehart.org/blog/client/index.cfm/2018/11/15/on_production_use_of_java_going_forward" rel="nofollow">my blog post talking about the issue</a> (for those to whom this whole java 8/11 licensing question may be news). Thanks very much, Rakshith and to the CF team and management for solving this for us.

Comment by Charlie Arehart

Great news Rakshith and CF Team.

Comment by Benjamin Reid

Great news - thanks so much!

Comment by Phillip Chrisman

It would be nice to (eventually) get a clear definition of what "for ColdFusion customers to run their ColdFusion applications" means. For example, we have developed substantial amount of custom Java code for use as part of our CF apps. We access the code from CF via CreateObject("java"...) and other mechanisms that allow bridging CF and Java. I would think that this clearly counts as part of "running a CF application", but there can be less clear situations. I would also like to know if the ability to download Java updates will be restricted to purchasers of currently supported CF versionsonly (11, 2016, 2018). We have some unsupported versions in production (10, 11) running on Java 8. While I don't expect CF to support these versions of CF as such, would we be at least entitled to download the updates for Java 8 (and use at our own risk)?

Comment by Legorol San

Minor correction: I meant to write supported CF versions (2016, 2018), unsupported version (10) and very soon unsupported (11). In other words this is a pertinent question for CF 11 users as well, will we still be able to download Java 8 updates after CF 11 support ends?

Comment by Legorol San

Hi Rakshith, I couldn't succeed settling up data source,  any help?

Comment by yogeshsurati

Yogesh, what has that question to do with this blog post? You should create a "question" (instead of a comment on a blog post). And beyond that  please add there more detail on what you are seeing, the version of cf, and so on.

Comment by Charlie Arehart

Many thanks for this information, Rakshith. I'd be very grateful if you could clarify just one more thing. For those of us who have manually updated Java for CF, where the update is installed outside the ColdFusion root, e.g. C:\Java\jdk1.8.0_191\jre is this covered under Adobe's agreement with Oracle,  or do updates need to be installed within the ColdFusion installation root (C:\ColdFusion2016\jre)? (I should add that the updated version installed outside the CF root is used exclusively on the server for CF and the CF-packaged version of Jetty).

Comment by Michael Clark

Good, so this means we can stick with Java 8? We have some compiled third-party code, which would break if there was a new Java version required in a future update. So I am glad to here we can stick with Java 8 (unless I misunderstood).

Comment by kevinbenore

Michael, I realize you will want to hear from Adobe, or better to see the legal terms. But as this is about covering use of Java by CF, I can't imagine it would somehow be tied to the directory where Java is installed, but instead only to its use by CF (and that bundled jetty server for the Add-on service, only). To give still more credence to this, note that Adobe DOES recommend we keep the JVM updated (to the latest minor release of the major release supported by a given CF version and update), and when they tell us to update Java, they DO tell us to install it where it normally goes--outside of the CF folder. (FWIW, some folks have mistakenly told their Java installer to implement itself within CF, leading often to trouble. If nothing else, it's also then impossible to easily revert back to the previous Java version.) So again, bottom line, I realize you need to hear it from Adobe, but it would be shocking if somehow the license was tied to "where" Java was installed. But your covering bases, so I understand the question. :-)

Comment by Charlie Arehart

Kevin, I realize you are asking Adobe, but since it's in reply to my comment I'll just add that the answer would seemingly be yes, unless you mean that "compiled third-party code" was being used OUTSIDE of CF. If you mean only that you'd call those Java objects from within CFML, then yep this license covers the use of Java by CF. Still, I suppose (like Michael Clark's question above about whether it matters "where" Java is installed), you are just covering your bases. Let's see what else Adobe may say.

Comment by Charlie Arehart

Thanks for commenting, Charlie. I'm aware of all the points you make, and as you mentioned, all I'm looking for is the legalese to just confirm what we pretty much know.

Comment by Michael Clark

Thank you for clarifying that Rakshith!

Comment by Peter Freitag

Thank you, Rakshith!

Comment by Lance Smith

Michael, so long as Java is solely used within the ColdFusion context, you should be fine. The directory where you install should not be a problem.

Comment by Rakshith Naresh

Legoral San, as long as every Java access is from within a CF application, you are fine. You can use Java on unsupported ColdFusion versions too at your own risk. I will recommend that you move them to supported versions as soon as possible.

Comment by Rakshith Naresh

Great to hear that, Rakshith. Many thanks for responding.

Comment by Michael Clark

I apologize if this has already been answered but I'm not seeing it at the moment. At least not specifically mentioned. In order to be covered to use Java with ColdFusion must we install only those versions provided by Adobe?  What I mean is, going forward as Oracle continues to update Java with security fixes and such, will we have to wait for Adobe to provide a Java download for us to use with ColdFusion or can we continue to get the latest Java updates directly from Oracle's website and still be covered to use it?

Comment by Miguel Fernandez

Further to Miguel's questioning: Why did/is Adobe using the Java PSU (Patch Set Updates) version, rather than the Java CPU (Critical Patch Updates) version? With Java 8/9/10 there was a Server JRE (ideal for production environment - that excluded development tools and client-side browser components) - Java 11 doesn't seem to have a Server JRE version - should we therefore just be using the ZIP version? Is it safe for production or does it still contain development tools, etc?

Comment by Benjamin Reid

Question:  Where do we get the download from???  Will Adobe supply it?  Our PTB will not pay for support from Oracle (understandably), so we can't get it from Oracle. V/r, ^ _ ^

Comment by WolfShade

Will Oracle make the updates publically available or will they put the updates behind a login?

Comment by Bernhard Döbler

Wolf, yes, Adobe supplies the JVM updates, or you can get them from Oracle. They are on the CF downloads page: https://www.adobe.com/support/coldfusion/downloads.html#additionalThirdPartyInstallers And that is pointed to from the technotes for the updates released on Feb 12 when Java 11 support was added (CF2018 u2, CF2016 u8). FWIW, the later updates from Feb 22 (or Mar 1) do NOT point to that list, which may be why you didn't notice that the JVM downloads exist. Instead, they point folks back to the previous release to read more (though only suggesting it's about "bug fixes"). We can hope they may improve that. And while the downloads page does offer the latest Java 8 update also (202 only, not 201), curiously the technote for CF11 u16 (also released on Feb 12) does NOT point to the downloads page. That seems an oversight. And some have complained that they would like to see the Java 8 201 update as well, and more than just the jdk for 8).

Comment by Charlie Arehart

<em>Well after posting my comment to WolfShade, I now see Charlie’s reply. It was not there before so my reply is out of context.  I’m not sure we want to rely on Adobe keeping the Java downloads page(s?) up to date.</em>I have asked the same question here and on the CFML Slack channel.  No response.  I don’t get it.  It is a pretty straight forward question.

Comment by Miguel Fernandez

Miguel, you say “no response” to wolf’s question. Please confirm you see mine here, right above yours, replying to his question in depth.  Or is it that you prefer to hear from Adobe directly? If so, what particularly in my reply is not sufficient. Sincere question, not a snark.

Comment by Charlie Arehart

Odd, as my reply to wolf was from yesterday. Anyway, as I said to him, you don't HAVE to use the Adobe downloads. Use the oracle ones. They are binary the same. See Adobe offering them as a convenience for now.. But I know: you and others will want to hear from Adobe.  I'm just trying to fill the void when I can.

Comment by Charlie Arehart

No worries Charlie.  When I clicked to reply to this thread I did not see your comment (the one before mine).  It was not there.  I promise.  It was only after I posted my reply that I saw your comment.  Even though yours was posted hours before mine.  ???? So from your reply, we will be able to download updated versions of Java from Adobe <em>OR</em> Oracle and still be covered under Adobe's agreement with the Oracle license.  Did you get that from Adobe?  I have not seen it posted anywhere.

Comment by Miguel Fernandez

Ha, ha, and again I did not see this comment until after I posted mine. But I think this time we were actually commenting at the same time.

Comment by Miguel Fernandez

If they are binary the same how could it possibly make a difference? Again, I know people want to hear more from Adobe on this licensing issue. I have asked also above, for a definitive licensing agreement. That we CANNOT infer from the installers.

Comment by Charlie Arehart

It's truly just my lack of understanding on the license agreement.  I just want to make sure I am adhering to it going forward.  I don't want to put our company at risk for being out of compliance.

Comment by Miguel Fernandez

Again, I agree on the need for us to be a able to see and reference a legal agreement between Adobe and Oracle, on behalf of CF users. 100%. It's the matter of installers where I'm simply sharing facts, where I can.

Comment by Charlie Arehart

And thank you for that Charlie.  I truly appreciate it!  I just don't understand how the folks at Adobe are not chiming in.  It seems to me a very straight forward question.  The lack of a response from them, on various channels, is making me wonder if that is true.

Comment by Miguel Fernandez

If what is true, you mean whether one of the questions is straightforward? Which one do you mean then? As for why they may not respond, well  they don't seem committed to answering every comment addressed to them here. We could hope they would, but clearly no one seems to follow every comment the way some of us in the community do. We can surely wish they would  and that clear and important unresolved questions could be ensured to be answered. (Anyone remember the old cf community manager position, which was a paid Adobe role?) And as for slack, I don't follow it (just can't stand the lack of structure or easy review of previous comments in a given thread, perhaps from days ago, as we can do here or in any web forum or mailing list). But I know it used to be Anit Panda who watched that for the cf team. He left Adobe last month, announcing that (so not just disappearing on us). If no one at Adobe has stepped in to fill that void on slack, and won't, and won't here, then we're back to getting what we get only when we can get it. Not perfect, but we can all pitch in as we usually have had to, helping each other as we can, and pressing Adobe when we need their response. You can also email cfsup@adobe.com  or cfinstal@adobe.com. Sometimes they will answer directly a question you can't seem to get answered publicly.

Comment by Charlie Arehart

I am referring to my original question; do we have to get updated Java installers from Adobe or can we get them directly from Oracle and remain under the Adobe licensing agreement with them. Regarding Slack, yes I'm aware Anit has left and he was great at responding. However, there are other Adobe folks chiming in on other questions in the Slack channel, but not mine (I also posted this question over there).  Which just heightens my fear that there is more to this then we know.

Comment by Miguel Fernandez

I think it's that any legal question has to go through hoops to get a statement. As for the downloads, you can read the oracle agreement. It says nothing about where you get them.. It just says you need to have licensed it to use it in prod. That's why we need THAT question (about the license) answered more clearly, I'd argue.

Comment by Charlie Arehart

Agreed!  Thanks for the conversation Charlie.  At least somebody is listening ;)

Comment by Miguel Fernandez

Charlie, I have gotten a reply from Adobe on the CFML Slack channel. I will post their reply here as a new comment so it is not buried in these replies.  Interested to hear your take on it.  Unfortunately it is not a very detailed response.

Comment by Miguel Fernandez

I received a response to my question from Sandip Halder of Adobe over on the CFML Slack channel. I am reposting his reply here for others to see.  My question was<blockquote>In order to stay within the Oracle Java license agreement do we have to use the Java installers from Adobe or can we still get them from Oracle when needed?</blockquote> Sandip’s reply was simply<blockquote>We checked this and you would have to use Java installers from Adobe and not from Oracle.</blockquote>Wil then asked:<blockquote>Are the installers from Adobe different? and is this for Java 8 or both Java 8 and Java 11?</blockquote>To which Sandip replied:<blockquote>Will, installers are same but license attached to them are different and this is for both Java 8 and 11.</blockquote>For those signed up on the CFML Slack here is a link to his comment – <a href="https://cfml.slack.com/archives/C06TABBT8/p1552070787188800" rel="nofollow">https://cfml.slack.com/archives/C06TABBT8/p1552070787188800</a>     <em>Ugh, after editing this comment all formatting has been lost.</em>

Comment by Miguel Fernandez

License attached where, Sandip?

Comment by Charlie Arehart

I just understood Oracle released JAVA 1.8.211, yesterday. On oracle.com it's available behind a log in. Will it be available on https://www.adobe.com/support/coldfusion/downloads.html ?

Comment by Bernhard Döbler

This doesn't make sense. If the binary installers are identical between what's offered at the Adobe CF downloads page and the Oracle downloads page, why (indeed how can it be) that the "license attached" to them is different? The license is shown and agreed to within the installer. It HAS to be identical, if the installers are identical. And when I have done comparisons of the same jvm installer (version, update, bit level, os), they HAVE been identical. Someone may wonder "why press on about this". The issue is that when new JVM udpates come out, it is sometimes a matter of days before they appear on the Adobe CF downloads page (mentioned in this and other comments here, <a href="https://www.adobe.com/support/coldfusion/downloads.html" rel="nofollow">https://www.adobe.com/support/coldfusion/downloads.html</a>). During those days, some may want to get the JVM update ASAP, and so they are left wondering, "is it really ok to get them from Oracle, if I am willing to login there?" Wil's comment and conversation with Sandip here was about that matter. I appreciate Wil's effort, and his sharing it here, and that Sandip was willing to offer an answer. I just don't see how the answer is logically consistent with what I'm seeing and saying here. All that said, I am not a lawyer, and am not advising people on what to do, and I take no responsibility for anyone's actions. I'm simply asking questions and offering counterpoints for consideration. It's sad that so many aspect of this matter can't get more clarity in response. For instance, many other comments here are unanswered. And what I am asking here is something that someone (Sandip or otherwise) ought to be able to respond to, to help me see how I could still be wrong in my contention.

Comment by Charlie Arehart

It would be helpful for Rakshith or anyone from Adobe to update this post (the body, in addition to any reply to this) to indicate that it all still applies to Java 12 (and above), now that CF2018 and 2016 can support Java 12, as of the updates released yesterday, Sep 24 2019. And please do offer whatever clarity you can on 12 AND ABOVE, because 12 is just a short-term release, as will be 13 (like 9 and 10 were). 14 is due out soon also. (Granted, 12 had not even come out at the time of this post, in Jan 2019.) I suppose a problem is that in some future time (could be years from now), the agreement that Adobe has with Oracle (the subject of this post) could expire, so that is a challenge with leaving the wording TOO open. But with the Java world (Oracle and OpenJDK) going to such rapidly changing version numbers (and sometimes very short lives), it is important to make announcements like this one in a way that can be read to apply beyond just the current release, at the time it was written.

Comment by Charlie Arehart

What about version 10 enterprise with all the patches installed in them? Highest version of java joke? Thanks

Comment by lawrencen48280106

What about version 10 enterprise with all the patches installed in them? Highest version of java installed? Thanks

Comment by lawrencen48280106

Lawrence, are you referring to Java 10? That is no longer supported by Oracle. It was a" short term" release, like 9 and 12, 13, and 14. Java 8 and 11 are the current "long-term support" (LTS) versions. Or might you have meant cf10? Only cf2016 and 2018 are supported/updated as of now, 2020.

Comment by Charlie Arehart

Ah, I found another post where Lawrence asked the question with more clarification. He DID mean to be referring to CF10. And I offered a more targeted answer, with a link to more, in his comment there: <a href="https://coldfusion.adobe.com/2016/10/installing-and-troubleshooting-java-updates-in-coldfusion/">https://coldfusion.adobe.com/2016/10/installing-and-troubleshooting-java-updates-in-coldfusion/</a> Sadly, there's no way I know of to link directly to a specific comment.  

Comment by Charlie Arehart