Skip to content
This repository was archived by the owner on Jun 29, 2020. It is now read-only.

Conversation

@tianon
Copy link
Contributor

@tianon tianon commented Nov 19, 2019

This drops JRE 7, Alpine, and updates supported architectures to account for upstream changes (docker-library/openjdk#322).

I believe this is what's got Travis failing over on docker-library/official-images#6998.

If you want to continue supporting other architectures, I'd recommend checking out AdoptOpenJDK which does support more architectures (and is still very vanilla, although is Ubuntu-based instead of Debian-based, so may be more of a breaking change depending on how folks are using jetty).

Copy link
Contributor

@gregw gregw left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It looks like the travis CI is still trying to build the jre7 and alpine versions.
So this PR should at remove the alpine/jre7 references from .travis.yaml and from the Makefile all target.

@gregw
Copy link
Contributor

gregw commented Nov 20, 2019

@md5 removing the alpine versions feels a bit drastic... is this what we should be doing?

@md5
Copy link
Member

md5 commented Nov 20, 2019

I would defer to @tianon on this

This drops JRE 7, Alpine, and updates supported architectures to account for upstream changes.
@tianon
Copy link
Contributor Author

tianon commented Nov 20, 2019

Doh sorry, I've updated .travis.yml now, but I left Makefile since it's using the make wildcard function which doesn't mind having an extra glob -- happy to remove that too though.

On the subject of Alpine, the OpenJDK project does not officially support Alpine/musl, which is why it was dropped from the openjdk image except for the EA builds, which then get dropped at GA (see Project Portola for more information about the upstream efforts to support musl properly).

If you want to continue to support Alpine-based images, your only options are openjdk:14 (which will likely go away at 14's GA just like 13, 12, etc did) or ibmjava (which might see less and less maintenance now that IBM is pushing adoptopenjdk instead).

@gregw
Copy link
Contributor

gregw commented Nov 20, 2019

I think an approach of pruning supported builds and then adding new ones by demand is best.

@gregw gregw merged commit 277f32f into appropriate:master Nov 24, 2019
@tianon tianon deleted the arches branch November 24, 2019 05:35
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants