[External] : RE: [Updates Communication] 16.0.2 security changes pushed

[Langer, Christoph]

Thanks Rob.

So, can I assume for the future that tags will be merged into master (as always) and you'll additionally provide branches for individual update releases?

Cheers
Christoph

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Robert Mckenna <rob.mckenna at oracle.com>
> Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Juli 2021 15:15
> To: Langer, Christoph <christoph.langer at sap.com>
> Cc: jdk-updates-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: [External] : RE: [Updates Communication] 16.0.2 security
> changes pushed
> 
> Apologies, that is an oversight. The merge should be pushed with the branch
> (as per 16.0.1) - I’ll rectify this shortly.
> 
>     -Rob
> 
> 
> > On 22 Jul 2021, at 10:57, Langer, Christoph <christoph.langer at sap.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Rob,
> >
> > thanks for pushing the changes.
> >
> > However, the concept with using branches seems quite new... Was this
> somehow announced or documented? Can we expect this in the future? I'm
> asking because the contract between the jdk16u repository and our
> downstream automation is broken by this. We currently pull branch 'master'
> and check the contained tags.
> >
> > The problem is that tag jdk-16.0.2-ga has not been merged into 'master'.
> The master branch only contains jdk-16.0.2+3. Also a "git diff master jdk-
> 16.0.2-ga" is not empty.
> >
> > So, can you please merge jdk-16.0.2-ga into master?
> >
> > Thanks & Best regards
> > Christoph
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: jdk-updates-dev <jdk-updates-dev-retn at openjdk.java.net> On
> >> Behalf Of Robert Mckenna
> >> Sent: Donnerstag, 22. Juli 2021 01:23
> >> To: jdk-updates-dev at openjdk.java.net
> >> Subject: [SUSPECTED SPAM] [Updates Communication] 16.0.2 security
> >> changes pushed
> >>
> >> (along with the 16.0.2 branch)
> >>
> >>    -Rob