Re: oracle-jdk17 deletion

[Greg Troxel <gdt%lexort.com@localhost>]

Robert Swindells <rjs%fdy2.co.uk@localhost> writes:

>> I object, until there's a posted analysis that there are no programs in
>> pkgsrc that need 17 (and aren't 1005 ok with 21), and that there are no
>> users who could be using 17, wihtout being egregiously out of date.
>
> There is still the lang/openjdk17 package that builds the JDK from source.

True, but that's a separate issue.  We remove packages when there is a
reasonable belief that there are no users, or that the gain to users is
smaller than the cost to the project.  Here, there's been no
articulation of reasons to believe that.

> A further question could be whether we want to include any Oracle
> binaries in pkgsrc.

Yes but off topic for a removal request.  It's already coded for no
distfiles and no binaries on DCROM, and not restricted for FTP.  If,
after reading the license carefully, you think that's wrong, please
explain (really; I'm not claiming there are no defects in pkgsrc!).

> Someone could create a package for Adoptium Temurin JDK 17 to use
> instead of the Oracle one.

Sure, and feel free to start and put it in wip.  But again, off topic
for removal request.