Re: OpenJDK package - JTREG 7.1

[Vladimir Petko <vladimir.petko@canonical.com>]

Hi,

I have uploaded a draft [1] to salsa. I have kept changelog from
jtreg6 (in line with jtreg6 packaging which kept jtreg changelog). Was
it a correct thing to do, or should it be truncated?
I could not find an ITP bug for jtreg6, does it mean that there is
some other process that I need to follow?

Best Regards,
 Vladimir.

[1] https://salsa.debian.org/vpa1977/jtreg7
[2] https://tracker.debian.org/pkg/jtreg6
[3] https://salsa.debian.org/java-team/jtreg

On Fri, Mar 3, 2023 at 3:53 PM Thorsten Glaser <t.glaser@tarent.de> wrote:
>
> On Fri, 3 Mar 2023, Vladimir Petko wrote:
>
> >It is definitely an option to chase those errors and failures down and
> >ensure that basic tests pass with jtreg 7.1.1, but keeping around
> >jtreg6 for JDK 17 and jtreg7 for JDK 20 is probably an easier option
> >that will not require a lot of maintenance overhead.
>
> Thanks for investigating. Yes, you’ve got convincing arguments, as it’s
> not a drop-in compatible replacement ☺
>
> bye,
> //mirabilos
> --
> Infrastrukturexperte • tarent solutions GmbH
> Am Dickobskreuz 10, D-53121 Bonn • http://www.tarent.de/
> Telephon +49 228 54881-393 • Fax: +49 228 54881-235
> HRB AG Bonn 5168 • USt-ID (VAT): DE122264941
> Geschäftsführer: Dr. Stefan Barth, Kai Ebenrett, Boris Esser, Alexander Steeg
>
>                         ****************************************************
> /⁀\ The UTF-8 Ribbon
> ╲ ╱ Campaign against      Mit dem tarent-Newsletter nichts mehr verpassen:
>  ╳  HTML eMail! Also,     https://www.tarent.de/newsletter
> ╱ ╲ header encryption!
>                         ****************************************************