Updating the version number

[Volker Simonis]

Why do we need to keep "(18.3)" in the name? In my personal opinion
that version schema was a mistake and there's no need to keep any
reference to it.  "Java SE 10 (18.3)" looks rather confusing to me as
opposed to simply saying "Java SE 10".


On Fri, Dec 1, 2017 at 7:41 PM, Brian Goetz <brian.goetz at oracle.com> wrote:
> I am sure everyone has seen the extensive discussions on version numbers.
> Mark has recently posted a JEP capturing a concrete proposal:
>
>     http://openjdk.java.net/jeps/8192828
>
> The high-order bit here is that we're proposing going back to numbering
> things 10, 11, 12, including the platform specification.
>
> JSR-383 (https://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=383) contains 11 occurrences of
> the string "18.3":
>
>  - Title
>  - Description
>  - 2.1 Proposed Specification (2x)
>  - 2.3
>  - 2.14 links
>  - 2.15 RI and TCK (2x)
>  - 2.19 link
>  - 2.20 link
>  - 3 Contributions
>
> Assuming no one here objects, I will ask the PMO to change all of the
> non-link usages of "18.3" in the JSR to "10 (18.3)", as in "Java SE 10
> (18.3)" or "The Java SE 10 (18.3) Platform Specification".
>
> I will propose a similar change for JSR-384 (Java SE 18.9) once that JSR is
> approved and the EG formed.
>
>