Am 23.04.2016 um 13:42 schrieb Julien Cristau: > On Sat, Apr 23, 2016 at 10:56:33 +0200, Markus Koschany wrote: > >> Hello, >> >> what are your thoughts about this bug? I intend to upload java-common >> myself on the 26 June but I think it would still be preferable to fix >> the other packages with a point update. >> >> I saw that Rene intends to fix libreoffice-nlpsolver (#819443) himself. >> Of course that's fine with me, just wanted to let you know that I'm >> aware of it. >> > Is there a particular reason these changes shouldn't be done in > wheezy-lts rather than wheezy proper?
There are mainly two reasons: - Dealing with those bugs in Wheezy proper would be the correct way of fixing them IMO. Actually they are not security related but are already a concern for Wheezy users. A fix would allow users to choose a different Java runtime and would not force them to install OpenJDK 6 or a non-free alternative. It will only become a matter of security when the support for OpenJDK 6 is discontinued in Wheezy LTS in two months. - wheezy-proposed-updates would be a sensible way to test the new packages. I don't expect any complications with those packages because we only change runtime dependencies but it would be a less abrupt change than uploading to wheezy-lts later. This only makes sense if we do it sooner rather than later and the last point update should be before the 26 June. If you disagree, please let me know so that I can prepare the uploads for Wheezy LTS. Cheers, Markus
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
