Bug#850921: why do we still have openjfx-java version 8 in unstable ?

[shirish शिरीष]

Dear maintainer,

Why do we have libopenjfx-java version 8 in unstable -

$ apt-cache policy libopenjfx-java
libopenjfx-java:
  Installed: (none)
  Candidate: 8u161-b12-1
  Version table:
     8u161-b12-1 100
        100 http://cdn-fastly.deb.debian.org/debian unstable/main amd64 Packages


When now the default-jre in testing is openjdk-10

$ aptitude show default-jre=2:1.10-65
Package: default-jre
Version: 2:1.10-65
State: installed
Automatically installed: yes
Priority: optional
Section: java
Maintainer: Debian Java Maintainers
<pkg-java-maintainers at lists.alioth.debian.org>
Architecture: amd64
Uncompressed Size: 6,144
Depends: default-jre-headless (= 2:1.10-65), openjdk-10-jre
Suggests: default-java-plugin
Provides: java-runtime, java10-runtime, java2-runtime, java5-runtime,
java6-runtime, java7-runtime, java8-runtime, java9-runtime
Description: Standard Java or Java compatible Runtime
 This dependency package points to the Java runtime, or Java
compatible runtime recommended for this architecture, which is
openjdk-10-jre for amd64.
Homepage: https://wiki.debian.org/Java/

The only sensible reason I see it being there, is when libopenjfx-java
would be separated from openjfk-java-jre in openjfk-11 release
supposed to be released sometime in September 2018 (probably end
September 2018) .

And if no major regressions are found then soonish in Debian testing.
so it's in time with Debian buster release. So for openjfx you
wouldn't have to go through the NEW queue and any transitions needed
could be quickly done.

If no major RC regressions are found, then be released with Debian
buster and any fixes can come in later release.

Is that the plan ?

-- 
          Regards,
          Shirish Agarwal  शिरीष अग्रवाल
  My quotes in this email licensed under CC 3.0
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/
http://flossexperiences.wordpress.com
EB80 462B 08E1 A0DE A73A  2C2F 9F3D C7A4 E1C4 D2D8