| 27 Mar 2025 |
 emily | theoretically we could keep them with knownVulnerabilities though | 00:42:24 |
 Tomodachi94 (they/them) | The reason I had this concern is because of what happened with Gradle 6 during the 24.11 release cycle. We ended up adding knownVulnerabilities to it, backporting that change to 24.05, then dropping it from unstable | 00:43:16 |
| Tomodachi94 (they/them) | "All roads lead to knownVulnerabilities" | 00:43:27 |
 msgilligan | This would work for me. I've had problems with JDKs being dropped when I have complex builds that require multiple recent versions. I'm trying to migrate off the dropped one as quickly as possible, but having say 23 disappear in the same commit as 24 appears makes this difficult. | 00:44:53 |
| emily | fwiw, nothing stops you from using OpenJDK 23 from the Nixpkgs revision before 24 was added | 00:46:06 |
| emily | while keeping the rest of your system on a newer rev | 00:46:15 |
| msgilligan | I just have to have two inputs in my flake? | 00:46:32 |
| emily | right | 00:46:35 |
| emily | being able to mix and match like that is part of why we generally err on the side of dropping stuff to ease maintainer burden | 00:46:55 |
| msgilligan | But I can't do that if I want to submit to Nixpkgs itself, right? | 00:47:19 |
| emily | it won't get updates to its dependencies, but the complex JIT engine is already the riskiest dependency in the tree anyway :) | 00:47:19 |
| Tomodachi94 (they/them) | Correct | 00:47:44 |
| msgilligan | This is why jextract had to be marked as broken, for example. | 00:48:28 |
| msgilligan | And a jextract-21 is practically useless because the features it relies on were "preview" and not final. Then when I updated to the latest jextract it generates code that requires JDK 23, so that forces anything that uses its output to JDK 23. | 00:50:01 |
| msgilligan | I would say jextract and jextract-21 should both be removed from 25.05 stable. And as soon as we get jextract 23, I would say we should remove jextract-21 from unstable. | 00:51:32 |
| emily | have they not even updated to 23 yet? 🫠 | 00:52:59 |
| emily | it's a little bizarre that the OpenJDK project can't keep up with their own release cycle :) | 00:53:16 |
| emily | I guess this is why people stick to LTSes | 00:53:27 |
| Tomodachi94 (they/them) | Off-topic: Lovely, Nixpkgs has a working Codespaces default now >:) | 00:54:10 |
| msgilligan | They have, and I've made a PR that works on aarch64-darwin but not aarch64-linux (thought that may be true of the upstream too) | 00:54:15 |
| Tomodachi94 (they/them) | (In theory; it's still setting itself up) | 00:54:30 |
| msgilligan | https://github.com/NixOS/nixpkgs/pull/384028 | 00:54:55 |
| msgilligan | There have also been some changes upstream and the PR should be updated and rebased (though they don't like they'll help with aarch64-linux) | 00:55:31 |
| Tomodachi94 (they/them) | (Everything works out of the box now! No more hacky workarounds needed) | 00:57:46 |
| msgilligan | Last week, I actually talked to someone from someone from Oracle who is responsible for jextract (at a JavaOne side event) and he admitted it needed some love.
I'm glad I haven't made it a direct dependency of my build. I just need to install it periodically and use it to generate Java source that I check in to the repository.
| 01:05:51 |
| msgilligan | He complained about the LLVM dependencies... | 01:07:03 |
| msgilligan | Hopefully things will stabilize around JDK 25 | 01:09:39 |
 Infinidoge 🏳️⚧️ | With regards to dropping JDK versions, unless they are actively a maintainability hazard, I would rather we keep as many versions as are reasonable | 01:18:17 |
| Infinidoge 🏳️⚧️ | The heuristic I propose is keeping JDK versions between LTS versions, and dropping only when the next LTS cycle begins | 01:18:42 |
| Infinidoge 🏳️⚧️ | (I talked with msgilligan about this at PlanetNix for a bit of extra context) | 01:19:46 |
