[issue-104] Move block help promote

[xavierfacq]

Description of change

Implement modifications from issues: #104 and #90

Please read carefully expected behaviors.

Check here: https://deploy-preview-422--adoptium-next.netlify.app/

Checklist

• npm test and npm run build passes

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for adoptium-next ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	c6dba07
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/projects/adoptium-next/deploys/690f63ba2fe24500085afd75
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-422--adoptium-next.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 73.92%. Comparing base (ad24ccc) to head (c6dba07).
⚠️ Report is 10 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #422      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   73.93%   73.92%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         177      176       -1     
  Lines        3346     3341       -5     
  Branches     1022     1022              
==========================================
- Hits         2474     2470       -4     
  Misses        742      742              
+ Partials      130      129       -1     

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[tellison]

Mostly good, but I would like to reword the sections about "defining the future of Java" - which is marketing speak that is open to misinformation.
Currently not in a position to offer a suggestion, but will do so tomorrow.

[xavierfacq]

@CarmenDelgadoEclipse can you check the Tim's comment above?

[tellison]

Added some specific suggestions. The theme is to ensure that we do not claim to speak for all Java, but that our supporters can help influence and evolve Adoptium projects.

[xavierfacq]

Thank you @tellison for your feebacks, before validated or not, I would like Carmen to give her opinion. 🙏

[CarmenDelgadoEclipse]

Thank you, @tellison, these updates will make a big difference! @xavierfacq +1 to everything Tim's suggested!

[xavierfacq]

@tellison I have reported all your suggestions, fixed the last problee with the tests. Everything seems to be ready to go live!

[karianna]

I'm not sure this phrasing is appropriate. OpenJDK upstream is OSS (and always will be), I think we want to say something like "Join us in ensuring the future of world-class, open, enterprise-ready Java runtimes"

[tellison]

I agree that this phrase requires some rethinking, as the implications just feel wrong. It is subtle, but there is good value in the Temurin project that we don't need to be writing anything that is open to misinterpretation or confusion.

[karianna]

@tellison Do we need to be careful about (Tm) here?

[tellison]

Again, I think we are on the correct side of (tm)-usage, but the change of title seems a little unnecessarily marketing-speak with the potential for causing subtle confusion. I say we just steer away from such phrases as 'evolving/defining/changing' the future of Java. That's not the goal of this project.

[xavierfacq]

Sorry, not sure to understand, do we have to change or rollback something then?

[tellison]

I agree that this phrase requires some rethinking, as the implications just feel wrong. It is subtle, but there is good value in the Temurin project that we don't need to be writing anything that is open to misinterpretation or confusion.

[tellison]

Again, I think we are on the correct side of (tm)-usage, but the change of title seems a little unnecessarily marketing-speak with the potential for causing subtle confusion. I say we just steer away from such phrases as 'evolving/defining/changing' the future of Java. That's not the goal of this project.