Re: Bug#975016: OpenJDK 15 support state for Bullseye
- To: Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org>, Moritz Mühlenhoff <jmm@inutil.org>, 975016@bugs.debian.org, Debian Release <debian-release@lists.debian.org>
- Subject: Re: Bug#975016: OpenJDK 15 support state for Bullseye
- From: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2021 16:36:13 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] 70839c9a-5366-b283-ab5f-5613e5d857e9@debian.org>
- In-reply-to: <20201202164210.GA4622@layer-acht.org>
- References: <160565089338.4090.11133710586870120280.reportbug@hullmann.westfalen.local> <20201118124652.GA8445@layer-acht.org> <160565089338.4090.11133710586870120280.reportbug@hullmann.westfalen.local> <20201119184845.GC7401@pisco.westfalen.local> <160565089338.4090.11133710586870120280.reportbug@hullmann.westfalen.local> <20201120084022.GA15957@layer-acht.org> <20201202164210.GA4622@layer-acht.org>
On 12/2/20 5:42 PM, Holger Levsen wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 20, 2020 at 08:40:22AM +0000, Holger Levsen wrote:
>>> Thanks for the upload.
>> :) note however that "#975016: OpenJDK 15 support state for Bullseye" is still
>> open...
>
> ping, has there been any progress on this?
chatting with Moritz from the security team, we found four options:
1) Ship a snapshot of OpenJDK 17 in bullseye. The package is
marked as a snapshot build. Mention in debian-security-support
and the Release Notes, that the package is unsupported. The
package should be updated to the final OpenJDK 17 release via
debian-security (final release is expected in October 2021).
I volunteer to do that, I also volunteer to prepare follow-up
updates, but unlikely for every security update which is
expected every three months.
2) Like option 1), but find somebody committing to constant security
updates. Mentioning in debian-security-support and the Release
Notes is not needed.
3) Provide OpenJDK 17 in the same archive area as planned for all
the go dependencies. I don't know what would be involved with
that.
4) Provide OpenJDK 17 in bullseye-backports only. I don't know
how it can land there. The backports section also might not be
enabled for everybody.
My personal preference would be option 1.
Matthias
Reply to: