JDK-8217305, JDK-8209002 and fixes

Kevin Walls kevin.walls at oracle.com
Mon Mar 11 22:34:03 UTC 2019

No problem...

Generally the confusing part I see is, it's not obvious if RFR emails 
were replaced with the fix-request keyword, and a Fix Request bug 
template/comment.  I see they are not, but it's not clear if they 
duplicate each other, or if they intend to separately deal with 
technical approval and push approval, the RFR vs RFA emails we had in 
the past.

On 11/03/2019 19:11, Hohensee, Paul wrote:
> Yes, please do it, Kevin. I'm still learning protocol, which in this case is "if you tag a bug as a backport fix request, you own pushing it".
> Thanks,
> Paul
> On 3/11/19, 11:35 AM, "Aleksey Shipilev" <shade at redhat.com> wrote:
>      On 3/11/19 7:20 PM, Kevin Walls wrote:
>      > Paul I was pleased to see your keyword addition, and the approval.  I didn't quite know if it meant
>      > you were taking the change I mentioned and getting it into the open 8u-dev (you're probably aware
>      > that in 8u with these build ones, we make the .m4 change, then run autogen.sh to regenerated
>      > generated-autoconfigure.sh, pushing both).  If you are, that's great.  If you aren't, I'll do it as
>      > I have it in my head, and it appears to be approved. 8-)
>      I think you can do it, Kevin!
>      The 8u push approval (jdk8u-fix-yes tag) is there, so the fix can be pushed to jdk8u/jdk8u-dev.
>      There are two little deviations from the process. These two things should have happened before push
>      approval was there:
>        a) "Fix Request" comment should be present in 8217305 describing what this patch is about, what
>      testing was done, and what are the risks;
>        b) Public RFR should be present for 8217305, given it is not a backport, but rather a new change
>      in 8u;
>      All that is nominally needed for maintainer to set jdk8u-fix-yes for the request, but that had
>      already happened. We might want to put pro-forma "Fix Request" [1] and pro-forma RFR on this list
>      [2] to make history look good if we even need to come back to this issue, and also for somebody to
>      eyeball the fix before pushing.
>      -Aleksey
>      [1] Example: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8211382?focusedCommentId=14247397#comment-14247397
>      [2] Example: https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2019-February/008684.html

More information about the jdk8u-dev mailing list