Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.maint.java > #12343
| From | Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | linux.debian.maint.java, linux.debian.devel.release, linux.debian.bugs.dist |
| Subject | Re: #975016 - OpenJDK 17 support state for Bullseye |
| Date | 2022-02-03 15:10 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <DMKY9-3Hn-1@gated-at.bofh.it> (permalink) |
| References | <BE8B3-75e-3@gated-at.bofh.it> <BFEyS-60u-11@gated-at.bofh.it> <BFPXj-55G-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| Organization | linux.* mail to news gateway |
Cross-posted to 3 groups.
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] - view raw
hi, almost exactly a year ago... On Sun, Feb 07, 2021 at 11:59:23AM +0100, Matthias Klose wrote: > So I'm going with option 1, preparing for an openjdk-17 in bullseye, and > preparing release notes and notes for security support. This is more > conservative than option 2, but allows to do better than the commitment made. > > The option also has the advantage that approval is only needed by the security > team. openjdk-17 already is in testing. granting unblock requests for new > snapshot builds by the release team would be appreciated, but isn't strictly > necessary as long as we can build newer snapshots. And that can be checked in > unstable. so, as I see it, openjdk-17 is in bullseye and now I'm wondering what I should do with #975016 titled "OpenJDK 17 support state for Bullseye" and filed against src:debian-security-support, as openjdk-17 seems to be supported and src:debian-security-support's purpose is to documented what's unsupported. so, should I just close this bug? -- cheers, Holger ⢀⣴⠾⠻⢶⣦⠀ ⣾⠁⢠⠒⠀⣿⡁ holger@(debian|reproducible-builds|layer-acht).org ⢿⡄⠘⠷⠚⠋⠀ OpenPGP: B8BF54137B09D35CF026FE9D 091AB856069AAA1C ⠈⠳⣄ A ship is always safe at shore, but that is not what it's built for. (Albert Einstein)
Back to linux.debian.maint.java | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar
OpenJDK 17 for bullseye-backports Adrian Bunk <bunk@debian.org> - 2021-02-02 19:30 +0100
Re: OpenJDK 17 for bullseye-backports Emmanuel Bourg <ebourg@apache.org> - 2021-02-06 23:50 +0100
Re: OpenJDK 17 for bullseye-backports Thorsten Glaser <t.glaser@tarent.de> - 2021-02-07 00:50 +0100
Re: OpenJDK 17 for bullseye-backports Emmanuel Bourg <ebourg@apache.org> - 2021-02-07 11:10 +0100
Re: OpenJDK 17 for bullseye-backports Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> - 2021-02-07 12:10 +0100
Re: #975016 - OpenJDK 17 support state for Bullseye Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2022-02-03 15:10 +0100
Re: #975016 - OpenJDK 17 support state for Bullseye Thorsten Glaser <t.glaser@tarent.de> - 2022-02-03 16:10 +0100
Bug#975016: #975016 - OpenJDK 17 support state for Bullseye Moritz Mühlenhoff <jmm@inutil.org> - 2022-02-10 11:40 +0100
Bug#975016: #975016 - OpenJDK 17 support state for Bullseye Matthias Klose <doko@debian.org> - 2022-02-12 03:10 +0100
Bug#975016: #975016 - OpenJDK 17 support state for Bullseye Salvatore Bonaccorso <carnil@debian.org> - 2022-08-17 21:40 +0200
Bug#975016: #975016 - OpenJDK 17 support state for Bullseye Holger Levsen <holger@layer-acht.org> - 2022-08-18 19:10 +0200
csiph-web