On Fri, 6 Mar 2026 17:18:06 GMT, Naoto Sato <[email protected]> wrote:
> Initially I thought listing LTSes in the expanded list, and put others > collapsed. Then I thought LTS is an Oracle thing and not Java SE spec > (although it's de-facto), so I am kind of hesitant to list them (CLDR might > be OK as it is JDK imp). Thus ended up to list the recent 5 releases. Do you > think it is OK to put Oracle's LTSes in the expanded supported Unicode > versions? I didn't mention LTS, my comment was more to have it include recent releases that are widely used as that. I see you've included a comment to aid future edits, I think it would be better to drop "LTS" from that note. ------------- PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/30099#issuecomment-4015986551
