On Tue, 4 Apr 2023 23:27:38 GMT, Kevin Rushforth <k...@openjdk.org> wrote:
> I started doing some testing today. Thank you, Kevin. I'm almost done with another round of my own testing and will post my results, too. > 2. The format of `VersionInfo.BUILD_TIMESTAMP`, which is used in constructing > the `javafx.runtime.version` System property for dev builds, has changed to > an ISO date -- `2023-04-04T15:11:59Z` rather than `2023-04-04-151159`. Since > the `:` is not legal for Java version strings, it is possible (though > unlikely), that some app is parsing this in a way that might run into > problems. This should probably be fixed. It always bothered me that developer builds get a timestamp suffix while the official builds do not, even when built from the same Git tag. For example: $ cat opt/javafx-sdk-20/lib/javafx.properties javafx.version=20 javafx.runtime.version=20+19 javafx.runtime.build=19 $ cat /snap/openjfx/current/sdk/lib/javafx.properties javafx.version=20 javafx.runtime.version=20+19-2023-03-07-164252 javafx.runtime.build=19 That makes it impossible for a developer to reproduce an identical copy of the official build. Would it be more appropriate to use the output of `git describe`? For example, below is the command's output for this pull request branch and for the `20+11` tag: $ git describe 21+11-25-ge42a070947 $ git describe allow-reproducible-builds 21+11-25-ge42a070947 $ git describe 20+11 20+11 The JDK does something similar for its `release` file: $ cat opt/jdk-20/release IMPLEMENTOR="Oracle Corporation" JAVA_VERSION="20" JAVA_VERSION_DATE="2023-03-21" LIBC="gnu" ... OS_ARCH="x86_64" OS_NAME="Linux" SOURCE=".:git:82749901b149" ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jfx/pull/446#issuecomment-1496766710
