On 02/24/2015 01:50 PM, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote:
On Tuesday, 24 February 2015 at 13:34, Severin Gehwolf wrote:
On Tue, 2015-02-24 at 12:43 +0100, Mikolaj Izdebski wrote:
[...]
==== option one - introducing new packages - preferred ====
1. main jdk is proclaimed as dead as it was until now. The new jdk is derived
as new package prviousName-legacy
Fedora already supports multiple JDKs installable in parallel. This was
inherited from JPackage project. This breaks long-established rule of
naming JDK packages as "java-x.y.z-vendor" used across different
distributions (JPackage, Fedora, RHEL, SUSE, ...)
[...]
The idea behind this "-legacy" suffix was to ensure a reasonable upgrade
path for people *only* using default java-x.y.z-openjdk package.
Consider the following scenario (all hypothetical, not saying that any
Fedora releases and JDK releases align in this way):
F22 has default JDK of java-1.8.0-openjdk. Then, F23 will get
java-1.9.0-openjdk as default and F24 java-1.10.0-openjdk as default.
The upgrade from F22 => F23 will install java-1.9.0-openjdk and remove
java-1.8.0-openjdk. Similarly, the upgrade from F23 to F24 will install
java-1.10.0-openjdk and remove java-1.9.0-openjdk. This is to ensure
that no old JDKs stick around on the majority of Fedora systems.
If the name was kept there does not seem to be a good way to:
1.) Ensure dist upgrades update JDK packages
2.) Ensure dist upgrades remove old JDK package (which may no longer
get security updates).
Do you see a way to achieve this without a name change of the package?
Wait. Don't you realize that java-1.8.0-openjdk and java-1.9.0-openjdk
are different packages?
yes they are, but the secon *is* update of first.
If there are any packages requiring java-1.8.0-openjdk they can keep
using it as long as it has a maintainer. java-1.9.0-openjdk will be
a completely new package.
Yes they can. But until now it was really bad idea.
IcedTea-Web was also wrong example - it is requiring *main* jdk. Nothing else.
And as it is not strightforward to compile ITW agains different jdks, then the strict rule have sense.
I agree with Mikołaj that there's no need for what you're proposing.
There is. Not using those rules will completly break fedaora+java as we know it now.
I would much rather live without any legacy jdk, and if so then without any rules. But not setting
them will bring chaos for majority of users.
J.
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
