Path: csiph.com!x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net!usenet.pasdenom.info!news.albasani.net!feeder.erje.net!news-1.dfn.de!news.dfn.de!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: v_borchert@despammed.com (Volker Borchert) Newsgroups: comp.lang.java.programmer Subject: Re: new JDK released 1.7.0_03 Date: 18 Feb 2012 06:54:29 GMT Organization: Private site at Eddersheim, Germany Lines: 18 Distribution: world Message-ID: References: <3uulj71vkkoiiv2hum5hg6anl4d5majer4@4ax.com> <4f3c55ee$0$290$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> X-Trace: individual.net gAfdU4TC8jBlj0zPbzv2iAKhFLnB9937hNPitSy2YCAgsqrUVP Cancel-Lock: sha1:a4o/Wksd/nJCEBCnWUOQWGnlcYk= Xref: x330-a1.tempe.blueboxinc.net comp.lang.java.programmer:12159 Fredrik Jonson wrote: > In <4f3c55ee$0$290$14726298@news.sunsite.dk> Arne Vajh??j wrote: > > > As far as I can see then OpenJDK does not even have a u3 only > > u2 and u4. > > It seems that oracle have reserved odd releases solely for security updates, > while feature releases are even numbered. I'm not suprised that they do the > even numbered releases out in the open with openjdk, while keeping the odd > releases with security fixes secret as long as possible. I have been wondering for some time why they put major changes into updates rather than teeny versions, e.g. 1.6.0_10 rather than 1.6.1 -- "I'm a doctor, not a mechanic." Dr Leonard McCoy "I'm a mechanic, not a doctor." Volker Borchert