Request for comments: New Bugzilla-based contribution process
Joseph D. Darcy
Joe.Darcy at Sun.COM
Mon Feb 23 18:03:51 UTC 2009
Volker Simonis wrote:
> Sorry for cross-posting, but I think the two threads are related and
> this post belongs into both of them:
> Just to name a current issue and demonstrate how complicated it may be
> to follow the development process, lets consider Bug ID: 6622432 (RFE:
> Performance improvements to java.math.BigDecimal):
> On the mailing lists, there was a Request for review:
> But I couldn't see a changeset for the bug. So apparently it is not in
> any of the OpenJDK 7 repositories (at least I couldn't find it).
> On the other hand, the Bug says "State, 8-Fix Available". Brad wrote
> "When the fix is put into one of the gates, the fix goes to "fix
> available" in bugtraq. It's the gatekeepers who mark as Fix
> Delivered." So apparently, the change went into a closed "gate".
> I would guess it could be the "JDK6 RE build" Mercurial repository
> mentioned by James Melvin in another thread
> because the list of fixed bugs for JDK 6u14 b01
> lists 6622432 as fixed. But this is in contradiction to the status of
> the bug which is "State, 8-Fix Available".
The HotSpot code is maintained a bit differently than the rest of the 6
update release train; the rest of the that release train is maintained
in the legacy teamware SCM system.
More information about the discuss