Updated Microsoft distribution to always be aware of up-to-date list of available jdk versions by jmjaffe37 · Pull Request #1071 · actions/setup-java

jmjaffe37 · 2026-07-01T19:03:39Z

Description:
Previously, the Microsoft distribution pointed at a json within this repo that has been outdated for a while now. This update now points the install script at a json in a Microsoft owned repo. This new json has automation in place to be updated automatically, so all future releases of setup-java will always have an up-to-date list of MS OpenJDK builds without need for updated setup-java versions :)

Related issue:
Add link to the related issue.

Check list:

Ran npm run check locally (format, lint, build, test) and all checks pass.
Mark if documentation changes are required.
Mark if tests were added or updated to cover the changes.

Copilot

Pull request overview

This pull request updates the Microsoft distribution’s “available versions” manifest source so setup-java no longer relies on an in-repo JSON file that can become stale, and instead pulls the manifest from a Microsoft-owned repository intended to stay current automatically.

Changes:

Removed the large, static microsoft-openjdk-versions.json manifest from this repository.
Updated the Microsoft distribution installer to fetch general_info/microsoft-openjdk-versions.json from microsoft/openjdk-adoptium-marketplace-data.
Updated the compiled dist/setup/index.js output to reflect the new manifest source.

Reviewed changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 3 changed files in this pull request and generated 2 comments.

File	Description
src/distributions/microsoft/microsoft-openjdk-versions.json	Removes the in-repo Microsoft OpenJDK version manifest.
src/distributions/microsoft/installer.ts	Switches manifest fetching to the Microsoft-owned repo/path.
dist/setup/index.js	Updates the built distribution bundle to match the source change.

💡 Add Copilot custom instructions for smarter, more guided reviews. Learn how to get started.

+    const owner = 'microsoft';
+    const repository = 'openjdk-adoptium-marketplace-data';
    const branch = 'main';
-    const filePath =
-      'src/distributions/microsoft/microsoft-openjdk-versions.json';
-
+    const filePath = 'general_info/microsoft-openjdk-versions.json';
    let releases: tc.IToolRelease[] | null = null;


gdams · 2026-07-01T19:14:01Z

    let releases: tc.IToolRelease[] | null = null;
    const fileUrl = `https://api.github.com/repos/${owner}/${repository}/contents/${filePath}?ref=${branch}`;



Yeah this one is likely a blocker, you'll get rate limited almost immediately. My initial thought is that we should upload this JSON file to the Visual Studio CDN as part of our release process and then update the link to it using aka.ms? WDYT @jmjaffe37?

Might also be worth talking to @dagood about this one @jmjaffe37 as we'd been talking about doing something similar for the Microsoft build of Go.

Yeah, we currently upload a branch-specific metadata file along with the artifacts to the VS CDN ("asset manifest (json)" row) and update a bunch of aka.ms URLs to point to it so you can get the latest build of a given branch, but we don't yet put our "which branches are actively supported" json on a CDN, and therefore we don't use it from places like this yet. (https://github.com/microsoft/go-lab/issues/201)

We do, though, for the pwsh install script in particular, use the GitHub raw endpoint if the user directs the script to do so. It downloads it through an aka.ms link that we can point to a better file later: https://github.com/microsoft/go-infra/blob/ab7545d931d0cc24e4bc8fc707fe31000826517d/goinstallscript/powershell/go-install.ps1#L293

(https://raw.githubusercontent.com/microsoft/go/refs/heads/microsoft/main/eng/doc/release-branch-links.json)

If you need a live-updated JSON that encompasses all Java branches right away, raw might be a way around it, but I'm not familiar with how production-ready it's considered nowadays.

(All of our CDN publishes happen from branch-specific pipeline runs for now, so we don't have a trivial way to toss a combined JSON file up on a CDN yet. No clue which parts of our path towards a good CDN-based approach are easy/hard/already-done for the Java infra. 😄)

@dagood, @gdams, thanks for the help and suggestions! I updated the code to use a https://raw.githubusercontent.com/... link for now since copilot says that this does not need auth, and it will not be rate limited.

What do you think? Does this seem to be a satisfactory solution for now?

Tbh for this use-case I'm probably okay with this. @dagood maybe we should just take the same approach for go?

.NET eventually moved away from this approach (a handful of years ago), so for me, at first glance, no, we shouldn't. 😄 It needs more investigation to be used in production IMO at the very least.

I asked Opus for some more info and it seems worse than I thought, in fact:

Should you depend on raw.githubusercontent.com for production or CI/CD?

Short answer: No. raw.githubusercontent.com is a convenience endpoint for viewing/fetching files interactively, not a supported content-delivery or distribution endpoint. GitHub itself now steers unauthenticated automated traffic away from it, and many large projects (including .NET) have migrated release metadata and install scripts to their own CDNs.

More details: https://gist.github.com/dagood/0532accee626f3c5219664da283f4c8c

https://github.blog/changelog/2025-05-08-updated-rate-limits-for-unauthenticated-requests/ in particular alludes to raw being subject to rate limits, although not clear about it. E.g. maybe not the same limit as APIs.

gdams

blocking until #1071 (comment) is resolved.

jmjaffe37 · 2026-07-01T20:40:38Z

I discovered a small bug: there is a mislabeled test. A test labeled microsoft 25 (jdk-x64) - macos-latest is actually running tests for arm64 binaries (see link below for log lines where this is shown. My test still passed, but this test should be relabeled appropriately. As this test was generated as part of a matrix, I suspect a number of other distributions' tests are mislabeled as well.

Link to proof in run logs: https://github.com/actions/setup-java/actions/runs/28541053114/job/84615774435?pr=1071#step:1:16

Edit: created gh issue -- #1072

jmjaffe37 added 4 commits June 30, 2026 16:51

Updated microsoft distribution to point to latest api endpoint json

20ae7c6

Added pre-push changes

a034e00

Removed extra alpine logic

7b00cfc

fully removed alpine

937558e

jmjaffe37 requested a review from a team as a code owner July 1, 2026 19:03

Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings July 1, 2026 19:03

Copilot started reviewing on behalf of jmjaffe37 July 1, 2026 19:04 View session

Copilot AI reviewed Jul 1, 2026

View reviewed changes

gdams requested changes Jul 1, 2026

View reviewed changes

jmjaffe37 mentioned this pull request Jul 1, 2026

Some of the arm64 workflow tests are mislabeled as x64 tests #1072

Open

5 tasks

Now using a 'raw.githubusercontent.com' link to avoid rate limitting

e25e7ef

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Uh oh!

Updated Microsoft distribution to always be aware of up-to-date list of available jdk versions#1071

Updated Microsoft distribution to always be aware of up-to-date list of available jdk versions#1071
jmjaffe37 wants to merge 5 commits into
actions:mainfrom
jmjaffe37:jmj/microsoft

jmjaffe37 commented Jul 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Uh oh!

gdams Jul 1, 2026

Uh oh!

gdams Jul 1, 2026

Uh oh!

dagood Jul 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

jmjaffe37 Jul 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

gdams Jul 1, 2026

Uh oh!

dagood Jul 2, 2026

Uh oh!

dagood Jul 2, 2026

Uh oh!

gdams left a comment

Uh oh!

jmjaffe37 commented Jul 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

		let releases: tc.IToolRelease[] \| null = null;
		const fileUrl = `https://api.github.com/repos/${owner}/${repository}/contents/${filePath}?ref=${branch}`;

Uh oh!

Conversation

jmjaffe37 commented Jul 1, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Pull request overview

Reviewed changes

Uh oh!

gdams Jul 1, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gdams Jul 1, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dagood Jul 1, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jmjaffe37 Jul 1, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gdams Jul 1, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

dagood Jul 2, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Should you depend on raw.githubusercontent.com for production or CI/CD?

Uh oh!

dagood Jul 2, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

gdams left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

jmjaffe37 commented Jul 1, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants

jmjaffe37 commented Jul 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading

dagood Jul 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading

jmjaffe37 Jul 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Should you depend on `raw.githubusercontent.com` for production or CI/CD?

jmjaffe37 commented Jul 1, 2026 •

edited

Loading