Groups > comp.lang.java.programmer > #19453

Re: JDK 1.7.0_09 and JDK 1.6.0_37 released

Date	2012-10-21 03:47 -0400
From	Arne Vajhoej <arne@vajhoej.dk>
Newsgroups	comp.lang.java.programmer
Subject	Re: JDK 1.7.0_09 and JDK 1.6.0_37 released
References	<ktir78lne1ut7256ng87fjbbk0ciuo5klo@4ax.com> <507e2a1e$0$22402$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosting.com> <507eca95$0$282$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> <k5tph9$4mi$4@Gaia.teknon.de>
Message-ID	<5083a8a1$0$286$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> (permalink)
Organization	SunSITE.dk - Supporting Open source

Show all headers | View raw

On 10/20/2012 5:05 AM, Volker Borchert wrote:
> Arne Vajhoej wrote:
>>
>> Oracle use odd for security fixed and even for other fixes and they had
>> planned to do:
>>
>> u5 - security fix
>> u6 - general fix
>> u7 - security fix
>> u8 - general fix
>> u9 - security fix
>> u10 - general fix
>>
>> After the release of u7 a zero day vulnerability was found, so they had
>> to release u9 out of order.
>>
>> To avoid going backwards in version numbers they had to call this
>> version for u10.
>
> Well then why don't they do
>
> 1.7.0_05 - security fix
> 1.7.1    - general fix
> 1.7.1_01 - security fix
> 1.7.2    - general fix
> 1.7.2_01 - security fix
> 1.7.3    - general fix
>
> The they could have easily done

Yes.

But naming conventions are just that.

Oracle decide to do things one way.

And they comply with that.

They could have chosen to do things dozens of different ways.

But the point on having a convention is to follow it.

And those that have programs that parse the version number may be
very happy that Oracle chose to be consistent.

Arne

Back to comp.lang.java.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

JDK 1.7.0_09 and JDK 1.6.0_37 released Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-10-16 14:07 -0700
  Re: JDK 1.7.0_09 and JDK 1.6.0_37 released Wayne <nospam@all.invalid> - 2012-10-16 23:46 -0400
    Re: JDK 1.7.0_09 and JDK 1.6.0_37 released Daniel Pitts <newsgroup.nospam@virtualinfinity.net> - 2012-10-16 21:17 -0700
    Re: JDK 1.7.0_09 and JDK 1.6.0_37 released markspace <-@.> - 2012-10-16 21:58 -0700
    Re: JDK 1.7.0_09 and JDK 1.6.0_37 released Roedy Green <see_website@mindprod.com.invalid> - 2012-10-17 00:26 -0700
      Re: JDK 1.7.0_09 and JDK 1.6.0_37 released Arne Vajhoej <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-10-17 11:22 -0400
    Re: JDK 1.7.0_09 and JDK 1.6.0_37 released Arne Vajhoej <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-10-17 11:11 -0400
      Re: JDK 1.7.0_09 and JDK 1.6.0_37 released v_borchert@despammed.com (Volker Borchert) - 2012-10-20 09:05 +0000
        Re: JDK 1.7.0_09 and JDK 1.6.0_37 released Arne Vajhoej <arne@vajhoej.dk> - 2012-10-21 03:47 -0400

csiph-web