Release Schedule

Andrew John Hughes ahughes at
Fri Jun 11 03:13:36 PDT 2010

On 11 June 2010 11:12, Andrew John Hughes <ahughes at> wrote:
> On 11 June 2010 09:41, Matthias Klose <doko at> wrote:
>> On 09.06.2010 11:50, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>> I have a number of new IcedTea releases in planning:
>>> * IcedTea6 1.6 branch:
>>> There will be a 1.6.3 release as the branch has a lot of patches not
>>> yet released including security updates.  It is ready for testing now.
>>>  I have a few more patches to look into, but it's otherwise ready.
>>> doko reported an issue with Zero a while back, but I've not heard
>>> anything since.
>> I didn't look at these anymore.  For my liking, the 1.6 branch has too many
>> build system patches backported, which apparently did break some
>> configurations.  I'd like to avoid these kind of backports for more recent
>> branches.
> Can you be more specific?  The only build changes added to that branch
> were necessary fixes to make it build (including updating hs11 support
> which was broken with the initial release).
>>> * IcedTea6 1.7 branch:
>>> There will be a 1.7.4 release to update the plugin with recent bug
>>> fixes in 1.8 and beyond.  This will be a plugin-only release.  Most of
>>> the patches have been backported (up to 1.8) and so this is also
>>> eligible for testing now.
>>> * IcedTea7:
>>> There will be based on b89 (Milestone 7).  I see from
>>> that we've
>>> apparently just reached Milestone 8, but I've seen nothing from Oracle
>>> on either milestone 6, 7 or 8 and I don't believe 8 is feature
>>> complete; I've seen no commits relating to closures for one thing.  As
>>> you may have seen from the IcedTea7 commits, I've been backporting
>>> over six months worth of work on IcedTea6 to IcedTea7 over the last
>>> few weeks.  There's still some to go, so I'll let the list know when
>>> it's worth testing.   But it should be soon.
>> Build patches are likely needed for some of the more obscure Debian builds.
>> if "soon" is too soon, then I'd like to make these build changes on a 1.7
>> branch as well. A release date after the IcedTea6 releases would be
>> appreciated.
> 'Soon' is referring to the backporting of patches from IcedTea6, not
> the release.  There are now just five left to check (some of which may
> not be forwardported).  All the plugin and Shark stuff is done, but
> I've no idea how well this works in practice because Shark changes
> were bundled together with Zero changes, with no bug IDs (if they were
> even upstreamed at all).  Zero is upstream in both OpenJDK6 and
> OpenJDK7 now, so local copies should preferably be dropped.
> The IcedTea7 release will be when it's ready, and I certainly prefer
> we ship something that works for you as well.  That said, I'd prefer
> it to be sooner rather than later, as both IcedTea6 and OpenJDK7 will
> move forward while we stabilise, and we don't want to release
> something too outdated.
> This note was to say we are (just about) ready for testing rather than
> release.  I still have to make the CACAO and VisualVM changes as
> mentioned below.  I expect Zero to be building by release.  Shark has
> never done a full bootstrap on any IcedTea7 release (in fact, I only
> think I've seen it done once on any version of IcedTea) so, while it
> would be nice to have, it's not a regression and thus not a release
> blocker.
>>> A couple of changes I plan for this release are updating the CACAO
>>> build to use the development branch: see
>>> and dropping VisualVM, which I believe is broken anyway.  VisualVM
>>> will be migrated to its own repository.
>>> I'd like to make the same VisualVM change with IcedTea6 HEAD in due
>>> course.
>> agreed. Did we hear back from VisualVM upstream to provide a visualvm
>> project on
> I haven't heard anything.
>> Is there some commitment from the CACAO project to keep the OpenJDK build
>> working?
> They suggested bumping to the development line, if you read the bug.
> Hopefully us testing it will push them into doing a new release.
> 0.99.4 is becoming more and more unmaintainable.  I got it to build,
> but not bootstrap.  The fix for that issue is apparently in the
> rewrite.
>>> As to IcedTea6 HEAD generally, I don't think we're ready for
>>> another release yet so I doubt we'll have a release based on b19.  The
>>> only major change there was an upgrade to hs16, which we provided as
>>> an option in 1.8 anyway.  I'd rather we wait for b20 and then begin
>>> preparing a release, stabilising on hs17, which will bring us in line
>>> with the proprietary JDK6.
>> skipping b20 sounds fine. I personally do not want to work on b19 anymore.
> We're skipping b19 (I imagine you meant 'skipping to b20'), the
> current IcedTea6 HEAD and moving to the new b20 release.
>>> For 1.8, I will backport any plugin fixes that are post-1.8 as I do
>>> them for 1.7, but I'll leave releases up to the release manager, doko.
>> please feel free to apply these to the 1.8 branch. Trying for a 1.8.1
>> release around the same time as for the 1.7.4 release.
> Done (I took your questions on IRC about them the other day as
> indication that you wanted them too).  The 1.7 branch is ready for
> testing and will be released as soon as it seems ready.
>>  Matthias
> --
> Andrew :-)
> Free Java Software Engineer
> Red Hat, Inc. (
> Support Free Java!
> Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK
> PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (
> Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA  7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8

I should also note that you can build with --enable-hg now to
get b20 ahead of time.  That branch will be merged to HEAD once b20 is
Andrew :-)

Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (

Support Free Java!
Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK

PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (
Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA  7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8

More information about the distro-pkg-dev mailing list