[jdk8u-dev] RFR: 8282552: Bump update version of OpenJDK: 8u342 [v2]

[Andrew John Hughes]

On Wed, 2 Mar 2022 18:18:45 GMT, Severin Gehwolf <sgehwolf at openjdk.org> wrote:

> > This is doing a lot more than bumping the update version.
> > I already filed a bug for the .jcheck/conf change: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8282458
> 
> I didn't know that existed. Happy to withdraw the `.jcheck/conf` changes from this PR, or withdraw entirely.

Thanks. No worries, I did link it to the SKARA bug but I guess you missed it. I was going to try and move further with this on Monday but the transition wasn't ready in time.

No objection to the content - i just copied your changes to the other PR, after comparing with 11u - I just wanted it to be clearer what change was being made. It took me a while to find the change in 11u because it was hidden in one of these 'bump' changes.

> 
> > That change should happen under that bug ID.
> 
> Sure.
> 
> > As to changing JDK_UPDATE_VERSION, we have not set this in the past for 8u and there was objection at the time to doing this. It certainly should have its own PR, separate from the necessary .jcheck/conf change.
> 
> I was thinking it would be something we could be doing for 8u so that `java -version` gives the developer an idea which update cycle this would be. We'd have to do `.jcheck/conf` updates every quarter now anyway. Example:
> 
> ```
> $ java -version
> openjdk version "1.8.0_342-internal"
> OpenJDK Runtime Environment (build 1.8.0_342-internal-sgeholf_2022_03_02_12_07-b00)
> OpenJDK 64-Bit Server VM (build 25.342-b00, mixed mode)
> ```
> 
> It still doesn't look like a real production build, which would match 11u IMO. Do you remember what the objection was?

Yeah, I have no objection. I originally proposed even doing the build number, but that was some pushback from Azul that I never really understood. I'll dig out the original thread.

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u-dev/pull/1