Future jdk9u updates & 9-critical-request

Andrew Haley aph at redhat.com
Thu Jan 25 17:31:53 UTC 2018

On 25/01/18 17:28, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 25/01/2018 16:46, Andrew Haley wrote
>> :
>> This is ridiculously hostile behaviour: to break a bunch of things
>> in OpenJDK, do a release, and then immediately drop the project
>> on the floor before giving anyone a chance to fix what is broken.
>> Really, I would have expected better than this.
>> I guess I'll have to be the project maintainer for long enough to
>> commit the necessary fixes so that jdk9u works for all ports, not
>> just the ones that Oracle ships.
> I don't think anyone deliberately broke anything. I think it's just that 
> 9.0.4 was a security release so the changes couldn't bake in 
> jdk-updates/jdk9u.

Sure, I understand that it wasn't deliberate.  However, the
immediate tagging and tying-off of the branch was.

> This may be something that the establishment of the vulnerabilities 
> group will help with.

That is surely true.

> Alternatively maybe the JDK Update maintainers could just approve
> the changes needed to get the ports aligned and leave it at that.

That would be nice.

> If someone steps up to maintain the JDK 9 updates going forward then
> they could tag a new release that includes the changes.

Well, I could formally take over the project, but it seems a bit
excessive.  I'll do that if it's the only way to get it done.

Andrew Haley
Java Platform Lead Engineer
Red Hat UK Ltd. <https://www.redhat.com>
EAC8 43EB D3EF DB98 CC77 2FAD A5CD 6035 332F A671

More information about the jdk-updates-dev mailing list