On 02/24/2015 02:17 PM, Aleksandar Kurtakov wrote:
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jiri Vanek" <jvanek@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, February 24, 2015 3:02:38 PM
Subject: Re: F22 System Wide Change: Legacy implementations of the Java platform in Fedora
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.
I have a question: Is there anybody that stepped in to maintain the legacy jdk?
If there is nobody to maintain it trying to come up with this guidelines now would be pointless.
In short I think that such guidelines would better be created *only* when there are interested parties, jointly with them and the process is played a bit by some copr repo or similar. Purely theoretical work is not needed.
There were several attempts in past like "can you please support jdk 7,6...in newer fedoras" and we
always told no. When come speech about "do it on your own" suddenly many questions marks raised up.
The last open bug is: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1190137 the guy is willing to
maintain it.
So deciding that legacy jdks are not never ever supportable, is also option.
Then we will move all users to that statement, and we will let them do theirs builds in copr...
Yes its possibility. It is actually the simplest one, but maybe not the generally desired one.
J.
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
