Hi Matthias. <snip>
I don't think that playing games with version numbers is a good thing to do. > Version numbers should match the upstream source release, and the binary > packages should not change that version. Of course openjdk has a split > personality to give even another version when called with java --version > > The final 11.0.3 release: > > https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk-updates-dev/2019-April/000951.html > > does *not* contain the ea specifier. > That's correct, there currently is no `-ea` labeling, it's something that I hope upstream will add. In the mean time you can assume that if it isn't `ga` then it's a pre release build > > > We (AdoptOpenJDK) would really be appreciative of that! We're aiming to > get > > consistency amongst all of the OpenJDK providers that 'good known GA' > > versions are deployed to end users. I can only apologise for not having > > reached out to the Debian community earlier to collaborate. Appreciate > the > > efforts being put in here! > > I don't care what AdoptJdk is doing. In the past, the only activity by > AdoptJdk > was trying to promote their builds for inclusion in some Linux distros. > AdoptJdk only supports a subset of the Debian architectures, and we really > don't > need yet another IcedTea. > Apologies for not being clear. AdoptOpenJDK is a community that promotes OpenJDK, yes we have our own builds (because there was an x-platform gap that needed addressing) but our *purpose* is to help solve issues that folks are having with OpenJDK. On a side note if there are Debian architectures that we're not building for then we'd like to know so we can get coverage for those. Our build farm is helpful in making sure the platform combinations have build and test coverage, we then fix issues upstream so all downstream providers get more stable builds (from the source in Debian's case). > > Is there anything we can do to help going forward? OpenJDK upstream has > a > > pretty good established policy around having the `-ga` suffix added to > > versions it would like downstream to take as a formal release. > > This is a recent addition. Last time I asked on an upstream mailing list, > everybody seemed fine with the versioning: > > https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk-updates-dev/2019-April/000969.html It is a recent addition yes, I don't think we (the OpenJDK community) communicated that well enough. Cheers, Martijn > > Is there > > anything else that OpenJDK can do to help Debian? One thing that > > AdoptOpenJDK provides is a free test pipeline in it's build farm that > could > > happily receive the Debian built binary and put it through 100,000+ tests > > and see if it matches what other OpenJDK providers are broadly producing, > > would that be of interest? > > I'm moving that discussion to upstream, but in summary you shouldn't a > dozen of > configure options to configure your build from source. Just release a sane > upstream tarball. > > Matthias >
