----- Original Message ----- > Mark, > > I did some experiments on weekends and I'm against of using -u option > under any circumstances. > > 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. >
I'm talking about cases where a sponsor isn't needed; where the person who wrote the changeset has commit rights and, if we were talking about the JDK, would be able to commit the change, given one or more reviews. In a case where the author doesn't have commit rights and a sponsor is required, it makes sense that contributed-by is used and the sponsor is the changeset author. FWIW, I've tended to stop using -u with IcedTea if the changeset needs to be altered due to merge issues, in order to signify that such changes were necessary. The original author can still be found in the original changeset. > 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. > These are fine for one-off patches. For regular committers, this process is not scalable. There is an option c; the author decides that they don't want to go through the huge amount of effort involved, not to mention the risk of not getting credit for it, and decides not to contribute the patch at all. This is one of our onboarding problems, IMHO. > -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 > > > > > -- > Dmitry Samersoff > Oracle Java development team, Saint Petersburg, Russia > * I would love to change the world, but they won't give me the source code. > -- Andrew :) Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) PGP Key: 248BDC07 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EC5A 1F5E C0AD 1D15 8F1F 8F91 3B96 A578 248B DC07
