<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 10/11/07, <b class="gmail_sendername">Peter B. Kessler</b> <<a href="mailto:Peter.Kessler@sun.com">Peter.Kessler@sun.com</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Tim O'Brien wrote:<br><br>><br>><br>> On 10/11/07, *Mark Reinhold* <<a href="mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org">email@example.com</a> <mailto:<a href="mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org">email@example.com</a>>> wrote:<br>><br>> > Would we need to somehow filter out the webrevs which
<br>> > contain closed sources?<br>><br>> Yes. That's a Sun-internal problem, though, so let's discuss it<br>> internally.<br>><br>><br>><br>> That's interesting, what sort of code is closed? Is there ever going
<br>> to be a case where a webrev contains certain sections that are public<br>> and certain sections that are private? since you mentioned it on a<br>> public list, could you give us a sense of what the public is missing?
<br><br>Think of the code we can't release because of the encumberances.<br>If we have to make changes in that code, we need to get reviews,<br>but we can't ask the community for help with those reviews.<br><br>Clearly the less code we have that we can't put in the open the
<br>better. But as long as that set is non-empty, it's something we<br>have to deal with, internally.</blockquote><div><br>Ok, so just to clear it up for the non-Sun folks this would be things like the font rasterization stuff that is still encumbered. Ideally the encumbered code shrinks over time, and there's less of a chance of a webrev spanning encumbered and non-encumbered code. I'd assume that you'll continue to use the internal review systems just for those code reviews.