JDK-8217305, JDK-8209002 and fixes

Andrew John Hughes gnu.andrew at redhat.com
Tue Mar 12 04:00:22 UTC 2019

On 11/03/2019 22:34, Kevin Walls wrote:
> 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.

I believe the Fix Request comment replaces the body of an RFA e-mail
(i.e. why should this be allowed, does it apply cleanly, if not where
was it reviewed).

Reviews (RFRs) work as they would for the current development tree.
Andrew :)

Senior Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)

PGP Key: ed25519/0xCFDA0F9B35964222 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net)
Fingerprint = 5132 579D D154 0ED2 3E04  C5A0 CFDA 0F9B 3596 4222

More information about the jdk8u-dev mailing list