Re: Bug#975016: OpenJDK 15 support state for Bullseye
- To: Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org>
- Cc: 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: Moritz Mühlenhoff <jmm@inutil.org>
- Date: Wed, 3 Feb 2021 19:51:40 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] YBrwvIYtFhb5WaM8@pisco.westfalen.local>
- In-reply-to: <70839c9a-5366-b283-ab5f-5613e5d857e9@debian.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> <70839c9a-5366-b283-ab5f-5613e5d857e9@debian.org>
Am Tue, Jan 26, 2021 at 04:36:13PM +0100 schrieb Matthias Klose:
> 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.
Ack, ideally we can come up with someone committing to 2), but those
are all workable options.
Cheers,
Moritz
Reply to: