On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 10:52:14AM +0300, Sergei Golovan wrote: > Hi Steve,
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2016 at 11:52 AM, Steve Langasek > <steve.langa...@canonical.com> wrote: > > Package: erlang > > Version: 1:18.3.4+dfsg-1 > > Severity: wishlist > > Tags: patch > > User: ubuntu-de...@lists.ubuntu.com > > Usertags: origin-ubuntu yakkety ubuntu-patch > > In Ubuntu, we've applied a patch to erlang to specify the java bytecode > > compatibility level to use when building. This patch was first applied > > during the transition to openjdk6, so it's quite old, and currently we only > > support openjdk8 in testing/unstable/the Ubuntu devel series so there is > > *currently* no effect on compatibility to not use this patch. However, > > there will be future java transitions again, so in discussion with the > > Ubuntu Java maintainers we've agreed it's useful to keep this patch instead > > of dropping it. > > So as the same logic seems to apply to Debian, I am forwarding the patch for > > your consideration. > I see that in Ubuntu you set the java compatibility level as 1.8. Is > there any policy requirement or docs about that. I remember that I set > it to 1.5 for some lintian warning a long time ago, and I'd like to > know if I should bump it as well. I don't think there's any policy requirement one way or the other. When I bumped it, this was driven by the fact that I thought we had to patch it and 1.5 was unnecessarily low - openjdk-6 is only in oldstable in Debian, and openjdk-7 is only in stable, and the last Ubuntu LTS release was openjdk-8. So there seems to be little practical reason to maintain compatibility with 1.5 or 1.6; Debian might prefer to remain compatible with 1.7 for right now. -- Steve Langasek Give me a lever long enough and a Free OS Debian Developer to set it on, and I can move the world. Ubuntu Developer http://www.debian.org/ slanga...@ubuntu.com vor...@debian.org
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
