Wiki - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Java25AndNoMoreSystemJdk Discussion thread - https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/f43-change-proposal-java25-and-no-more-system-jdk-system-wide/147319
This is a proposed Change for Fedora Linux. This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee. == Summary == Add java-25-openjdk with non blocking mass bump and rebuild. == Owner == * Name: [[User:jvanek| Jiri Vanek]] * Email: jva...@redhat.com == Detailed Description == JDK 25 will be released in September 2025, and will most likely become a LTS JDK. It will be added to all live Fedoras, however in f43 and higher, it will provide "java". Note, that in f43 and f44, there still will be JDK21, and it will continue to provide "java". java-latest-openjdk won't be providing "java" as usual, and it will be bumped to JDK26 as soon as possible. JDK21 will remain in Fedoras, until it is newest JDK providing java in any live Fedora (f44) - as described in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ThirdPartyLegacyJdks). Highlight - the JDK21 will no longer be present in f45. <b>Highlight:</b> In practice, this means that in f43 and f44, there will be two JDKs (JDK21 and JDK25) providing java. That is intentional, and it is unexpected consequence of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ThirdPartyLegacyJdks - because every third-party JDK is providing java. Maven and Ant tools has adapted to this schema already during the life-time of f41 and f42. This is conceptually removing the need of mass rebuild, because any package in f43 will be built by JDK21 as they are now, and maintainers will have more then year and half to migrate to JDK25. We will do a mass-rebuild, where we will try to build every java package by jdk25, but if they fallback, they will immediately roll back to jdk21, with maintainer notified. This transparency is handled in javapackages-tools/maven/ant... whose versionless requires still require JDK21, but have also version-full requires. Those version-full requires are recommended to be used, so packager is clear what JDK he wants to pull. My approach for mass rebuild will be bump to current version-less requires version-full - JDK25 - requires. If build fails, the "revert" will go to version-full - JDK21 requires, not to version-less. The https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/Java/ will need adjusting. The version-less being transparent as JDK21 requirement, should remain as it is, and will die on its own with removal of jdk21. Enumerations: * `javapackages-local-openjdk21` - requires `java-21-openjdk-devel` and in addition provides `javapackages-local` * `javapackages-local` requires `javapackages-local-openjdk21` and will die with it. * `javapackages-local-openjdk25` - requires `java-25-openjdk-devel` and provides only `javapackages-local-openjdk25` Same for `ant` and `maven-local`: * `maven-local` is alias for `maven-local-openjdk21`, and it will remain ** further packages should require '''maven-local-openjdkXY''' ** `maven-local-openjdk21` for "legacy" and `maven-local-openjdk25` for future * `ant` '''suggests''' `ant-local-openjdk21` ** once jdk25 is out, it should change (in rawhide/sine f43) to `ant-local-openjdk25` ** `ant` should always be used together with '''javapackages-local-openjdkXYZ''' ** without exact javapackages-local-openjdkXYZ ant is rolling reelase The JDKs are now stable and have smooth update path from one LTS to another over STSs, and similar behavior should be the desired one. Any packager can decide to keep any (available) JDK version, as long as it is in system, so if there is major breakage for them, they have more than a year to fix it. In scope of https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ThirdPartyLegacyJdks, the JDK will disappear from Fedora and will be recommended to be replaced by Temurin by losing its status of "system jdk" in any live Fedora (so JDK21 should no longer be available in f45). == Schedule == * 18.7.2025 Oracle CPU unembargo date * approx. 24.7 Oracle CPU reaches Fedora (hopefully stable) ** JDK25 has to reach Fedora as EA (because of the early branching) ** JDK may not need to be branched ** mass rebuild must happen in July * no later then 31.7 java-latest-openjdk will become jdk25 ** ideally immediately after CPU. * no later then 8.8. java-25-openjdk will be forked and used in rawhide ** ideally immediately after CPU. ** mass rebuild right after it * fedora branching 12.8.2025 - https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3362 ** no exception it seems * if mass rebuild will not happen, then the contingency plan is to go on without mass rebuild, just with devel announcement, and maybe do a mass rebuild in f44 == Feedback == <!-- Summarize the feedback from the community and address why you chose not to accept proposed alternatives. This section is optional for all change proposals but is strongly suggested. Incorporating feedback here as it is raised gives FESCo a clearer view of your proposal and leaves a good record for the future. If you get no feedback, that is useful to note in this section as well. For innovative or possibly controversial ideas, consider collecting feedback before you file the change proposal. --> todo == Benefit to Fedora == <!-- What is the benefit to the distribution? Will the software we generate be improved? How will the process of creating Fedora releases be improved? Be sure to include the following areas if relevant: If this is a major capability update, what has changed? For example: This change introduces Python 5 that runs without the Global Interpreter Lock and is fully multithreaded. If this is a new functionality, what capabilities does it bring? For example: This change allows package upgrades to be performed automatically and rolled-back at will. Does this improve some specific package or set of packages? For example: This change modifies a package to use a different language stack that reduces install size by removing dependencies. Does this improve specific Spins or Editions? For example: This change modifies the default install of Fedora Workstation to be more in line with the base install of Fedora Server. Does this make the distribution more efficient? For example: This change replaces thousands of individual %post scriptlets in packages with one script that runs at the end. Is this an improvement to maintainer processes? For example: Gating Fedora packages on automatic QA tests will make rawhide more stable and allow changes to be implemented more smoothly. Is this an improvement targeted as specific contributors? For example: Ensuring that a minimal set of tools required for contribution to Fedora are installed by default eases the onboarding of new contributors. When a Change has multiple benefits, it's better to list them all. Consider these Change pages from previous editions as inspiration: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Annobin (low-level and technical, invisible to users) https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ParallelInstallableDebuginfo (low-level, but visible to advanced users) https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/VirtualBox_Guest_Integration (primarily a UX change) https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/NoMoreAlpha (an improvement to distro processes) https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/perl5.26 (major upgrade to a popular software stack, visible to users of that stack) --> Fedora will stay on top with fresh technologies by having newest JDK available immediately and having new system JDK as soon as possible. Fedora will become multi-java friendly distribution, where each JDK vendor built will be correctly reusable. https://openjdk.org/projects/jdk/25/ https://openjdk.org/projects/jdk/24/ https://openjdk.org/projects/jdk/23/ https://openjdk.org/projects/jdk/22/ == Scope == * Proposal owners: <!-- What work do the feature owners have to accomplish to complete the feature in time for release? Is it a large change affecting many parts of the distribution or is it a very isolated change? What are those changes?--> We will add JDK25 to Fedora, and will ensure, that it "java" provides are correct. That also means no java provides in f41 and f42 * Other developers: <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> <!-- What work do other developers have to accomplish to complete the feature in time for release? Is it a large change affecting many parts of the distribution or is it a very isolated change? What are those changes?--> Maven and Ant stacks are already adapted thanx to https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ThirdPartyLegacyJdks#adoptium-temurin-java-repository Other packagers may need to update packages to work fine with jdk25 or freeze their package to exact (21) version of JDK, and will have a year and half to fix theirs issues. * Release engineering: [https://pagure.io/releng/issues #Releng issue number] <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> <!-- Does this feature require coordination with release engineering (e.g. changes to installer image generation or update package delivery)? Is a mass rebuild required? include a link to the releng issue. The issue is required to be filed prior to feature submission, to ensure that someone is on board to do any process development work and testing and that all changes make it into the pipeline; a bullet point in a change is not sufficient communication --> * Policies and guidelines: N/A (not needed for this Change) <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> <!-- Do the packaging guidelines or other documents need to be updated for this feature? If so, does it need to happen before or after the implementation is done? If a FPC ticket exists, add a link here. Please submit a pull request with the proposed changes before submitting your Change proposal. --> * Trademark approval: N/A (not needed for this Change) <!-- If your Change may require trademark approval (for example, if it is a new Spin), file a ticket ( https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issues ) requesting trademark approval from the Fedora Council. This approval will be done via the Council's consensus-based process. --> * Alignment with the Fedora Strategy: ok, I think <!-- Does your proposal align with the current Fedora Strategy: https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/fedora-strategy-2028-february-march-planning-work-and-roadmap-til-flock/43618 ? It's okay if it doesn't, but it's something to consider --> == Upgrade/compatibility impact == <!-- What happens to systems that have had a previous versions of Fedora installed and are updated to the version containing this change? Will anything require manual configuration or data migration? Will any existing functionality be no longer supported? --> <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> User which was used to have exactly one - system - JDK, may end in having two. == Early Testing (Optional) == <!-- This is an optional step for system-wide changes to avail of. If you would like to build an initial proof of concept of your change and have a member of Fedora QA help you write and/or run some initial basic tests on your code, please email te...@fedoraproject.org and include the link to your change proposal. This step is *optional*. --> Do you require 'QA Blueprint' support? Y/N <!-- Optional Step for System-Wide Changes only --> == How To Test == <!-- This does not need to be a full-fledged document. Describe the dimensions of tests that this change implementation is expected to pass when it is done. This can be based off of the above section if early testing has been completed. If it needs to be tested with different hardware or software configurations, indicate them. The more specific you can be, the better the community testing can be. Remember that you are writing this how to for interested testers to use to check out your change implementation - documenting what you do for testing is OK, but it's much better to document what *I* can do to test your change. A good "how to test" should answer these four questions: 0. What special hardware / data / etc. is needed (if any)? 1. How do I prepare my system to test this change? What packages need to be installed, config files edited, etc.? 2. What specific actions do I perform to check that the change is working like it's supposed to? 3. What are the expected results of those actions? --> <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> todo == User Experience == <!-- If this change proposal is noticeable by users, how will their experiences change as a result? This section partially overlaps with the Benefit to Fedora section above. This section should be primarily about the User Experience, written in a way that does not assume deep technical knowledge. More detailed technical description should be left for the Benefit to Fedora section. Describe what Users will see or notice, for example: - Packages are compressed more efficiently, making downloads and upgrades faster by 10%. - Kerberos tickets can be renewed automatically. Users will now have to authenticate less and become more productive. Credential management improvements mean a user can start their work day with a single sign on and not have to pause for reauthentication during their entire day. - Libreoffice is one of the most commonly installed applications on Fedora and it is now available by default to help users "hit the ground running". - Green has been scientifically proven to be the most relaxing color. The move to a default background color of green with green text will result in Fedora users being the most relaxed users of any operating system. --> Change should be transparent to all users and power users. Users will have latest JDK as soon as possible, as usual, and all Java packages should remain fully operational. == Dependencies == <!-- What other packages (RPMs) depend on this package? Are there changes outside the developers' control on which completion of this change depends? In other words, completion of another change owned by someone else and might cause you to not be able to finish on time or that you would need to coordinate? Other upstream projects like the kernel (if this is not a kernel change)? --> <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> * Whole javastack will be affected and verified as much as possible. * this proposal depends on existence of `java-25-openjdk` ** review NEW https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2352963 * which depends on existence of `java-25-openjdk-portable` ** review CLOSED_RAWHIDE: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2351138 == Contingency Plan == <!-- If you cannot complete your feature by the final development freeze, what is the backup plan? This might be as simple as "Revert the shipped configuration". Or it might not (e.g. rebuilding a number of dependent packages). If you feature is not completed in time we want to assure others that other parts of Fedora will not be in jeopardy. --> * Contingency mechanism: (What to do? Who will do it?) : ** If it goes wrong, all packages will remain on JDK21. The JDK25 will stay there, and will also most likely still provide java ** If the multiple java providing schema will case to work, the jdk21 java provides will be stripped off, and normal mass rebuild will happen. <!-- When is the last time the contingency mechanism can be put in place? This will typically be the beta freeze. --> * Contingency deadline: beta freeze <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> <!-- Does finishing this feature block the release, or can we ship with the feature in incomplete state? --> * Blocks release? No <!-- REQUIRED FOR SYSTEM WIDE CHANGES --> == Documentation == === common issues packagers can face and gathered solutions === ==== Removed SecurityManager ==== Any applications with security manager will need to explicitly stay on jdk21 or heavily update. SecurityManager is deprecated since JDK17. * jdk24 jep: https://openjdk.org/jeps/486 == Release Notes == -- Aoife Moloney Fedora Operations Architect Fedora Project Matrix: @amoloney:fedora.im IRC: amoloney -- _______________________________________________ devel-announce mailing list -- devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-announce-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-annou...@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
