Skip to content

Update data#472

Merged
roele merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
issues/update-data
Jun 10, 2026
Merged

Update data#472
roele merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
issues/update-data

Conversation

@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Automated changes by create-pull-request GitHub action

@roele roele merged commit d2df8bf into main Jun 10, 2026
2 checks passed
@roele roele deleted the issues/update-data branch June 10, 2026 21:22
@greptile-apps

greptile-apps Bot commented Jun 10, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Greptile Summary

Automated data update adding JetBrains JBR 25.0.3-b508.4 builds across all GA platforms and promoting the OpenJDK 28 EA entry from a malformed 28.0.0-ea placeholder to the properly versioned 28.0.0-ea+1 with a corrected timestamp.

  • GA files (8): New JBR b508.4 builds (jre, jdk, jre_jcef, jdk_jcef, lb variants) added for linux, macOS, Windows, and alpine-linux on both aarch64 and x86_64; in ga/linux/x86_64.json two existing musl b496.62 entries are relocated to the end of the array.
  • EA files (4): OpenJDK 28.0.0-ea+1 entries are inserted at their correct sorted positions and the previously appended 28.0.0-ea entries (with a truncated created_at format and wrong version string) are removed; two of these files (ea/linux/x86_64.json, ea/macosx/aarch64.json) lose their trailing newline in the process.

Confidence Score: 4/5

Safe to merge with one data-consistency question: verify whether the musl JDK b508.4 omission in ga/linux/x86_64.json is intentional.

Most of the changes are straightforward build-catalog additions with consistent checksums and correct metadata. The EA corrections fix a previously malformed version string and timestamp. The one concern is that ga/linux/x86_64.json receives a new musl JRE for b508.4 but not the corresponding musl JDK, while alpine-linux/x86_64.json gets both — leaving the two endpoints out of sync for that build type.

public/api/jvm/ga/linux/x86_64.json — check whether the musl JDK b508.4 entry should be present here in addition to the musl JRE b508.4 that was added.

Important Files Changed

Filename Overview
public/api/jvm/ga/linux/x86_64.json Adds 7 new JetBrains JBR 25.0.3-b508.4 builds for linux/x86_64; musl JDK b508.4 present in alpine-linux counterpart is missing here.
public/api/jvm/ea/linux/x86_64.json EA OpenJDK 28 entry corrected from malformed version/timestamp to proper 28.0.0-ea+1; trailing newline removed.
public/api/jvm/ea/macosx/aarch64.json Same EA OpenJDK 28 correction as linux/x86_64; trailing newline removed.
public/api/jvm/ga/linux/aarch64.json Adds 6 new JetBrains JBR 25.0.3-b508.4 builds for linux/aarch64; no issues found.
public/api/jvm/ga/alpine-linux/x86_64.json Adds musl JRE and JDK for JBR 25.0.3-b508.4; no issues found.
public/api/jvm/ga/windows/x86_64.json Adds 4 new JetBrains JBR 25.0.3-b508.4 builds for Windows/x86_64; no issues found.

Comments Outside Diff (1)

  1. public/api/jvm/ga/linux/x86_64.json, line 80490-80524 (link)

    P1 Musl JDK b508.4 missing from ga/linux but present in alpine-linux

    alpine-linux/x86_64.json receives both the new musl JRE and JDK for 25.0.3-b508.4 (jbrsdk-25.0.3-linux-musl-x64-b508.4.tar.gz, checksum 0bf815b8...), but ga/linux/x86_64.json only gets the new musl JRE (jbr-25.0.3-linux-musl-x64-b508.4.tar.gz). The ga/linux file ends up with a newer JRE (b508.4) alongside an older JDK (b496.62), leaving users who select the latest musl JDK from the ga/linux endpoint on an older build than those using alpine-linux.

Reviews (1): Last reviewed commit: "Update data" | Re-trigger Greptile

"version": "28.0.0-ea"
}
]
] No newline at end of file

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

P2 Missing trailing newline at end of file

ea/linux/x86_64.json and ea/macosx/aarch64.json lost their trailing newlines in this update (\ No newline at end of file shown in both diffs). The other 10 files in this PR retain proper newline endings. While JSON parsers typically tolerate this, it breaks POSIX file-format compliance and will create noisy future diffs.

Note: If this suggestion doesn't match your team's coding style, reply to this and let me know. I'll remember it for next time!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant