Dmitry,
On 12/05/2013 23:42, Dmitry Samersoff wrote:
Mark,
I did some experiments on weekends and I'm against of using -u option
under any circumstances.
There are valid usecases for '-u'. For one, sync'ing from upstream
projects, Doug's CVS comes to mind.
-Chris.
People sponsoring changeset can make a mistake - most obvious one is
wrong merge conflict resolution. If it happens we are loosing the way to
solve the problem quickly - author know nothing about conflict but we
have no obvious record about sponsor.
So I think we have only two options (leaving aside extra repo) -
a) author prepare changeset by it's own and sponsor acts just as slow
bot - all problems transmitted back to author.
b) author send a webrev and sponsor uses Contributed-by: field to
respect credits.
-Dmitry
On 2013-05-10 01:47, mark.reinh...@oracle.com wrote:
2013/5/9 2:10 -0700, gnu.and...@redhat.com:
Indeed. I do this with the Oracle patches when applying them to IcedTea.
The problem is how this gets done is down to the sponsor; I've had ones
that have been imported, ones where I've just been giving the Contributed-by
attribution (despite having commit rights) and at least one with no credit at
...
An example I just came across when looking into an issue:
changeset: 2657:46cb9a7b8b01
parent: 2647:ca1f1753c866
user: dsamersoff
date: Wed Aug 10 15:04:21 2011 +0400
files: src/share/vm/runtime/os.cpp
description:
7073913: The fix for 7017193 causes segfaults
Summary: Buffer overflow in os::get_line_chars
Reviewed-by: coleenp, dholmes, dcubed
Contributed-by: a...@redhat.com
That should have had 'aph' as the user. If you get the default output:
changeset: 2657:46cb9a7b8b01
parent: 2647:ca1f1753c866
user: dsamersoff
date: Wed Aug 10 15:04:21 2011 +0400
summary: 7073913: The fix for 7017193 causes segfaults
it looks like Dmitry wrote the fix.
I'm sure there was no intent on Dmitry's part to try to claim credit for
this fix.
The most important principle to be maintained here is that people get
proper credit for their work, as you wrote earlier.
Beyond that, it's reasonable to prefer that credit be given in the "most
obvious" way, in particular by using proper usernames, when available,
in changesets. If a sponsor makes a mistake, however, and winds up
using a Contributed-by: line instead, then that's unfortunate but not,
in my view, the end of the world.
In general, if you have the Author role (or higher) in some OpenJDK
Project then when you submit a change that requires a sponsor's help you
should send a Mercurial patch (hg export) or bundle (hg bundle) with the
proper username, summary, etc. In normal circumstances the sponsor
should not change the patch but merely make sure that it's properly
tested, merged, and pushed. If a change is required then the sponsor
should ask the submitter to create a new patch or bundle. If for some
reason the sponsor must modify the patch directly then the hg -u option
should be used, as appropriate, to preserve the submitter's user name in
the changeset. (Yes, this is one of those rare cases in which a sponsor
should use the -u option.)
Iris -- Could you please make a note to add guidance on this issue to
the next revision of the developers' guide? Thanks.
- Mark
