JDK 25.0.2 base repository

[Vladimir Petko]

Hi,

Would it be possible to create a tag for 25.0.2 pre-release? This
would allow us to do an early access build in Debian/Ubuntu.

Best Regards,
 Vladimir.

On Tue, Dec 16, 2025 at 5:15 AM Lindenmaier, Goetz
<goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Aleksey,
>
> Maybe we could do that rollback,
> but it would not be really nice.
> But is this really necessary?
> We don't need that for our process.
>
> Anyways, I announced this before jdk25u-dev was
> created: https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/jdk-updates-dev/2025-November/050191.html
> Actually when I proposed this there was
> a huge amount of outstanding backports, but
> in the end many were abandoned.
>
> How do you deal with *.0.1?  Is that different
> from now in any way?  Less hassle?
>
> Best regards,
>   Goetz.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Shipilev, Aleksey <shipilev at amazon.de>
> > Sent: Monday, December 15, 2025 4:48 PM
> > To: Lindenmaier, Goetz <goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com>; jdk-updates-
> > dev at openjdk.org
> > Subject: Re: JDK 25.0.2 base repository
> >
> > On 15.12.25, 15:45, "Lindenmaier, Goetz" <goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com
> > <mailto:goetz.lindenmaier at sap.com>> wrote:
> > > Yes, you can either sync below that change or pull jdk25.0.3+0, which is the
> > tag that does not yet contain any 25.0.3 changes.
> > > Basically it's like when testing a *.0.1 while changes for *.0.2 have already
> > been pushed to the respective repo.
> >
> > Right. It makes sense in pre-dev-split world.
> >
> > The problem with this approach after jdk25u and jdk25u-dev split is that
> > downstream vendors need to know that jdk25u is _not_ the base for a
> > quarterly release. It was a long-standing behavior (even codified on Wiki) that
> > downstreams can just pull from jdk${X}u and that would be sensible quarterly
> > release. It would make sense for jdk${X}u to contain recent GA bits right
> > before and immediately after the quarterly release. The downstream
> > pipelines are likely pulling the jdk25u now for testing -- what they think --
> > 25.0.2 EA, while in reality they get something else.
> >
> > We have caught this in our downstream Corretto 25.0.2 pipeline: we
> > automatically sync from openjdk/jdk25u for quarterly release baseline. And
> > the stuff that was not supposed to be in 25.0.2 was still there. We can
> > probably monkey-patch current pipelines to deal with it, but it is a hassle.
> > Anyway, I suspect we are not the only ones who this affects, and without
> > some sort of intervention, some vendors would accidentally release
> > something that is not a real 25.0.2. I strongly believe this is the problem
> > waiting to happen in only 4 weeks.
> >
> > Arguably, this is "no good deed goes unpunished" kind of thing: accepting
> > older PRs to jdk25u after the split was very convenient (thanks!), but now it
> > bites us in our collective rears.
> >
> > So, how do you feel about rolling back jdk25u to 25.0.2 state? I think jdk25u-
> > dev was already merged from jdk25u, so all 25.0.3 stuff should be in jdk25u-
> > dev already. It would be awkward if post-GA jdk25u -> jdk25u-dev merge
> > accidentally reverts some 25.0.3 stuff, though. I suspect that can be helped if
> > we merge from jdk25u immediately, preferring jdk25u-dev side.
> >
> > Something like (untested, just for illustration):
> >   a. jdk25u: git diff jdk25.0.3+0...HEAD > revert.patch
> >   b. jdk25u: git apply revert.patch && git commit -m "Revert to 25.0.2 state"
> >   c. jdk25u-dev: git merge upstream/jdk25u -s ours
> >
> > Thanks,
> > -Aleksey
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Amazon Web Services Development Center Germany GmbH
> > Tamara-Danz-Str. 13
> > 10243 Berlin
> > Geschaeftsfuehrung: Christof Hellmis, Andreas Stieger
> > Eingetragen am Amtsgericht Charlottenburg unter HRB 257764 B
> > Sitz: Berlin
> > Ust-ID: DE 365 538 597