On Tue, Jun 11, 2019 at 01:20:30AM +0200, Emmanuel Bourg wrote: > Le 10/06/2019 à 21:12, Sam Hartman a écrit : > > > My position is that the openjdk maintainers should make this decision > > based on what is best for our users based on the quality of the > > software. > > There is little doubt the OpenJDK users want the latest stable release > for their stable systems, and not an intermediary early access release. > > > > If our reputation is tarnished for doing the right thing, then perhaps > > tarnish is in. > > *sighs* > > It's your call Matthias then. > > It's a bit sad that after the countless hours poured over the last two > years into the transition to OpenJDK 11 my voice has no weight on this > final decision. We're in an awkward situation with respect to the JVM in the release, and I apologize for making it more awkward by second-guessing myself in the middle of a bug report. Avoiding a release with an early-access build of the JVM is why I got involved in the first place. Paul's comment about testing gave me pause; the thought of adequate testing at this stage of the release cycle (and then again for the security release of 11.0.4 GA) is daunting. For now, I am building a 11.0.4+4+really11.0.3+7-1 package as discussed. Once it completes successfully and passes some smoketests, I will follow-up with a link to the debdiff and binaries. I am not a member of the OpenJDK team and contributed far less to the JDK 8 -> 11 transition than Emmanuel has. If he and Matthias are in agreement and the plan is palatable to the Release and Security Teams, that's ideal. Thanks, tony
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature