Bug#1006647: libeclipse-jdt-core-java 4.21 breaks Java 8 compatibility for Tomcat

[Markus Koschany]

Hi,

Am Mittwoch, dem 02.03.2022 um 16:43 +0200 schrieb Per Lundberg:

[...]

> (Speaking about tomcat10, I noted the package in experimental is really 
> old - doesn't seem to have been updated for a few years. Do you know if 
> anyone is working on updating the package to e.g. Tomcat 10.0.17 or will 
> it perhaps happen later in the Bookworm release cycle?)

I intend to update it in the near future. I believe the initial goal was to
make it co-installable with Tomcat 9. Currently there are still some file
conflicts which have to be resolved before we can upload Tomcat 10 to unstable.

> 
> Also, I wonder if it wouldn't even make sense to remove openjdk-8-jdk 
> altogether from unstable at this point. The fact that it's present there 
> is actually a bit confusing, since it gives the (completely false) 
> impression that JDK 8 will be supported in future versions of Debian. If 
> you agree, I can file a separate removal bug on that package. (I'm not 
> currently a Debian maintainer myself, so I cannot help out more than 
> that. ;)

We still need OpenJDK 8 to bootstrap Kotlin. Please don't ask for its removal.
It would be great if we could use OpenJDK 11 instead but we are not there yet.

> 
> As for the actual libeclipse-jdt-core-java package, is there any 
> particular reason for going with the 4.21 version in Debian unstable & 
> bookworm? I am just curious. It feels like a somewhat odd decision to go 
> with a more recent version than the 4.20 version which Apache bundles in 
> their distribution. But perhaps there are other Debian packages which 
> can find use of the newer package, or has it perhaps just been done to 
> be able to ship the "latest and greatest" version of this package with 
> Bookworm? (I mean: to not ship something which is "old" already at the 
> time of release.)

I guess there was no particular reason other than upgrading to the latest
available version back then. I have not investigated yet if another Debian
package requires 4.21 specifically but since we don't really support Java 8
anymore I think we can just move forward. Tomcat 9 will be gone next year and
since we rather have to invest time into fixing OpenJDK 17 bugs than making
packages Java 8 compatible, I would say let's keep it as is. 

Regards,

Markus
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 963 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-java-maintainers/attachments/20220302/4d239bbf/attachment.sig>