Phil -
This fix has soaked in jdk8 for ~5 months. It was initially contributed
by Sean Chou who has an interest in jdk7u. Why can't it be backported if
he's willing to make JDK7u better ?
I'm not getting your argument around us needing to ramp down 7u fixes.
If folks want to contribute tried and tested fixes to jdk7u which would
appear low risk, then isn't it a win, win for all JDK users ? Yes, there
are risks to each fix but we have a large number of tests run for each
update release.
jdk7u is going to be around for many years to come. It's by no means a
product which we need to start decreasing fixes on in my view! Fixing in
jdk8 is also a requirement for jdk7u integration.
I do see validity in your point around deciding risk assessment of
backports. It's possibly something that we need to scrutinize more ?
That brings more work for reviewers of course.
regards,
Sean.
On 18/09/2012 18:44, Phil Race wrote:
Actually this clearly falls into the 'not remotely important enough to
backport' bucket.
So I would not approve this backport.
-phil.
On 9/18/12 10:39 AM, Seán Coffey wrote:
Approved for jdk7u-dev. Note that this most likely means the fix
will end up in 7u12. If there's a strong justification for 7u10
inclusion, let me know and one of the jdk7u maintainers can help you
work through a phase2 request[1] for 7u10.
I'll create a bug record to track this fix in jdk7u.
Regards,
Sean.
[1] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk7u/phase2/phase2-process.html
On 14/09/2012 09:55, Sean Chou wrote:
Hi all,
Here's a request of porting fix 7151427 back to JDK7, could you
please help
to review?
Bug: http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=7151427
Change set: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/2d/jdk/rev/b1af41b86f9f
Thread where it was reviewed:
http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/2d-dev/2012-March/002403.html
*
*
