Repositories, AdoptOpenJDK and github

Nir Lisker nlisker at
Tue Feb 27 14:31:48 UTC 2018

Iv'e given the pipeline some thought. I'm purposely ignoring current role
names (Author, Contributor...). My suggestions:

Potential contributor wants to contribute...

1. Formal process
  a. If the issue is not in the JBS, they submit it via bugreport.
  b. They send an email on the mailing list regarding the issue (a plan,
question on how to approach etc.)
  c. If the above effort is "deemed worthy" (whatever that means), and they
have signed the OCA, and they then they get access to JBS. If they've given
a GitHub account, they get access to GitHub PRs.
  d. Discussion from the mailing list is copied/linked to the JBS issue.
Maybe if it's their issue (step a) then the Reporter field can change to

This ensures that:
* There's 1 entry point.
* GitHub and JBS identities are linked (GitHub identity is verified).
* Being able to comment on JBS is easier - instead of requiring 2 commits
it requires good intentions(?)
* Not every person on the planet has access to JBS.

2. Work process
  a. They fork the GitHub repo.
  b. They create a PR with a 2-way link to/from JBS (similar to  current
webrevs - JBS links).
  c. Discussion specifically on the patch should happen in the PR thread.
General info on the bug (affected versions etc.) still happens in JBS.
  d. After the patch had been reviewed, it is committed to the Oracle repo.
Since GitHub mirrors Oracle I don't think it matters if the patch is merged
into GitHub.

This ensures that:
* It's easier to start working because the GiutHub repo is more convenient
than the Oracle repo currently.
* PRs and JBS issues are mutually aware.
* The submit -> review -> commit process is streamlined.

We pay a synchronization price for having 2 repos and 2 bug trackers. This
is what I could come up with.

- Nir

On Fri, Feb 16, 2018 at 1:14 AM, Kevin Rushforth <kevin.rushforth at
> wrote:

> Johan Vos wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 4:09 AM Kevin Rushforth <
> kevin.rushforth at> wrote:
> A global reference in JBS would indeed be very good to track back the work
> in a PR to a real issue. It can also be very useful as there are many
> existing issues in JBS that can be referred to in future work.
> The only issue I see is that in order to create an issue in JBS, you need
> to have "author" status, so not everyone can do this? Given the idea that
> developers who want to create a PR also need to sign an OCA, it might make
> sense to somehow combine the administration?
> I don't think we can combine this, but I hope to be able to relax the
> requirements to become an Author a little. The current guidelines are 2
> sponsored contributions [1].
> Pending appointment as an Author, it isn't hard to submit a bug via
> . If there is a test case, it usually gets
> moved to the JDK project within a day or so (and I can move them sooner, if
> needed). The bigger bother is that you can't comment in JBS on a bug you
> didn't create, but once the bug is there, you can work on it in GutHub
> and/or send email to the list. I'll also add any comments from contributors
> who are not yet Authors to any bug report.
> -- Kevin
> [1]
> - Johan

More information about the openjfx-dev mailing list