I have no idea when/why test bugs started to get counted for committer
status.
The last time I checked, number of lines of patch matters the most
irrespective of the significance of the patch [ that was a very
strange and funny way of judging a patch, must be an idea from a non
technical person].
If that would be the it;s way too easy to become committer in Javafx
community.
Looks like Javafx community does't have any proper way to judge patch
significance or the rules can be tailored as per the circumstances.
1)
Two of my DRT Media patches were counted as 0.5 and those were not
cosmic changes.[ May be now you give me a reason for that ? I also did
coding, testing and etc for those patches]
I'm still sure that cosmic changes in Editor file should be awarded as
0.5 instead of 1.
Saying a patch consist of coding, testing and etc, is just play of words.
All those activities are part of code changes and every body does
that, nothing special about it.
I don't see them as separate activities.
2)
For
patch http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/dc2963c3f7d1
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/dc2963c3f7d1> , I
can see 5 contributors.
I don't know the exact contribution from Rajath, it could be as small
as a comment change or could be the whole patch itself [ In that case
why do we have 4 other contributors ].
Considering equal efforts by all contributors [ taking the best case
], Individual contribution = [1/5] --> 0.2. For Committer status
round off --> 0.
So that patch is 0 for me, unless actual code changes can be shown.
Rest of the things look fine to me.
--Ankit
On Wed, Feb 28, 2018 at 10:34 AM, ankit srivastav <ank....@gmail.com
<mailto:ank....@gmail.com>> wrote:
Dear Kevin,
I will get back to you on this shortly with substantial claims.
--Ankit
On 28 Feb 2018 2:23 a.m., "Kevin Rushforth"
<kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com <mailto:kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com>>
wrote:
Hi Ankit,
In response to your veto, I took the opportunity to look at
the the list of changes, and believe that my earlier
nomination of Rajath to OpenJFX Project Committer was
justified, if perhaps barely so.
While there is no objective criteria by which one can say a
particular changeset is worth 0.5 of a fix, we do often look
at 2 to 4 trivial fixes or test-only fixes to "make up the
difference" in case only 6 or 7 are deemed "significant". This
is why we usually want 10 or 12 fixes before we nominate
someone for Committer -- to avoid quibbling over whether one
or two are worthy of being counted.
Rather than respond to each of your comments individually
(although I do have one point below), I will instead list the
fixes I consider significant.
In looking at the list of fixes again, I would consider the
following 7 non-test fixes to be significant, even though
several of them were only a few lines of product code changed:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/3d5c22069d1f
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/3d5c22069d1f>
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/5a3cc1b5bb22
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/5a3cc1b5bb22>
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/674513271a88
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/674513271a88>
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/dc2963c3f7d1
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/dc2963c3f7d1>
(see comment below)
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/9f43fb83e989
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/9f43fb83e989>
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/dedd5afd753e
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/dedd5afd753e>
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/cfa038af148b
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/cfa038af148b>
In all cases there needed to be an analysis, a fix, and
testing to ensure that the bug was fixed without introducing a
regression. As for your assertion about his part of the
collaborative fix to upgrade WebKit to v605.1, JDK-8187483
(changeset dc2963c3f7d1), you make an unsubstantiated claim
regarding his contribution. As he did contribute to that fix,
I don't see any reason to question how significant it was.
In addition to the above 7, and excluding JDK-8185314 (the
removal of unused files, which I would agree does not count at
all), the other three test fixes are in my opinion enough
justify the nomination.
I would finally point out that Rajath contributed three
additional test fixes during the two week voting period, for a
new total of 14 changesets (13 excluding the unused file removal).
Please respond to the list as to whether you feel the
additional three test fixes, along with my additional
explanation, is enough to satisfy your concerns over this
nomination, and if not, why not. I would like to put the
nomination forward again for a vote once the objections are
resolved.
Thank you.
-- Kevin
ankit srivastav wrote:
NO,
Please go through the table, all the points accumulated are
not even more then 7.
I have given reasons for my points.
*age*
*author*
*description*
Points
Reason
8 days ago
rkamath
8196802: 3D unit tests listed as pass although they are
actually skipped
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/1438734a46e3?revcount=20>
0.5
Test file, not a direct impact-able code change in product.
10 days ago
rkamath
8089454: [HTMLEditor] selection removes CENTER alignment
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/b86ce9469653?revcount=20>
0.5
A very small change, why I’m saying so, as the file modified
gets called directly from the APP written. No debugging/a
little is required to make the change, which actually defies
the purpose of getting knowledge of the product.
13 days ago
rkamath
8196615: Skip 3D unit tests on system without 3D capability
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/4f433399edbd?revcount=20>
0.5
Changes in Test file, not a direct impact-able code change in
product.
4 weeks ago
rkamath
8165459: HTMLEditor: clipboard toolbar buttons are disabled
unexpectedly
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/3d5c22069d1f?revcount=20>
0.5
A very small change, why I’m saying so, as the file modified
gets called directly from the APP written. No debugging/a
little is required to make the change, which actually defies
the purpose of getting knowledge of the product.
7 weeks ago
rkamath
8088925: Non opaque background cause NumberFormatException
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/5a3cc1b5bb22?revcount=20>
0.5
A very small change, why I’m saying so, as the file modified
gets called directly from the APP written. No debugging/a
little is required to make the change, which actually defies
the purpose of getting knowledge of the product.
2 months ago
rkamath
8090011: 'tab' key makes control loose focus
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/674513271a88?revcount=20>jdk-10+36
0.5
A very small change, why I’m saying so, as the file modified
gets called directly from the APP written. No debugging/a
little is required to make the change, which actually defies
the purpose of getting knowledge of the product.
*age*
*author*
*description*
Points
Reason
2 months ago
mbilla
8187483: Update to 605.1 version of WebKit
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/dc2963c3f7d1?revcount=20>
0
Unless you directly point what changes you have made in the
patch I will count it has 0. Most probably you have made
changes for DRT, which even a tester can do. Moving DRT is a
non technical task, requires no technical skills.
3 months ago
mbilla
8187928: [WebView] Images copied from clipboard not written
in source file format
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/9f43fb83e989?revcount=20>
1
4 months ago
ghb
8178290: Intermittent test failure in
test.com.sun.webkit.network.CookieTest
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/315c8aa5bc4c?revcount=20>jdk-10+29
0.5
Changes in Test file, not a direct impact-able code change in
product.
4 months ago
mbilla
8187726: [WebView] Copy and Paste of Image not resulting in
expected behavior
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/dedd5afd753e?revcount=20>jdk-10+27
1
4 months ago
mbilla
8187671: [WebView] Drag and Drop of text or html results in
an image
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/cfa038af148b?revcount=20>
1
5 months ago
ghb
8089124: HTML5: Number input allows non-numeric input
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/73ace584b9ba?revcount=20>
0.5
Only setting value changes. For me this kind of change was
not even get considered for Author status.
5 months ago
ghb
8185314: Remove unused third-party python scripts from WebKit
sources
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/rev/55ad191f5932?revcount=20>
0
No actual code change, you have only removed it.It seems it
was not even getting called otherwise you must have change
some other files which calls function from these files.
Adding all the points, total sum = 7.
So it's a NO for me.
I think you have to solve at least 3 more issues to get to
the committer status.
*
*
*The whole idea behind becoming a committer is to get good
solid product knowledge not the issue count.*
*Quality matters over quantity.*
Which one can only get after solving variety of issues with
various level of difficulty level.
Here I can see you have 3 checkins for file HTMLEditorSkin.java.
This file basically gets I/P from APP written.
No/little debugging skill is require to solve the issue in
this file.
For all the test changes I have awarded 0.5 as no direct
impact on product.
For DRT, moving DRT from one revision to another is just a
side job. Anybody can do that.
If I tell a 12th grader then even he can also do that.
Also I'm not sure what's the actual contribution so awarded as 0.
Removing a file, that's too unused, no code change so 0.
*I have awarded proper points to proper code changes.*
@Rajath:
I know you must be under pressure (No idea from whom) to
become committer, but I can see lots of potential in you.
You should not not succumb to such pressure.
Whole idea [as I have stated above ] to become committer is
get sound product understanding, don't stop yourself to get that.
*Solve issue to get knowledge not just to show counts to
other people.*
I can one more checkin from you, but that's too I guess in
Test file i.e. 0.5
So It seems, you are very close to your destination.
Let me now if anyone in the community has any objection.
--Ankit
On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:32 AM, Kevin Rushforth
<kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com
<mailto:kevin.rushfo...@oracle.com>> wrote:
I hereby nominate Rajath Kamath [1] to OpenJFX Committer.
Rajath is a member of JavaFX team at Oracle, who has
contributed 11 changesets [2][3] to OpenJFX.
Votes are due by February 26, 2018.
Only current OpenJFX Committers [4] are eligible to vote
on this nomination. Votes must be cast in the open by
replying to this mailing list.
For Lazy Consensus voting instructions, see [5].
Nomination to a project Committer is described in [6].
Thanks.
-- Kevin
[1] http://openjdk.java.net/census#rkamath
<http://openjdk.java.net/census#rkamath>
[2]
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/log?revcount=20&rev=author%28rkamath%29
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/log?revcount=20&rev=author%28rkamath%29>
[3]
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/log?revcount=20&rev=rajath.kamath
<http://hg.openjdk.java.net/openjfx/jfx-dev/rt/log?revcount=20&rev=rajath.kamath>
[4] http://openjdk.java.net/census#openjfx
<http://openjdk.java.net/census#openjfx>
[5] http://openjdk.java.net/bylaws#lazy-consensus
<http://openjdk.java.net/bylaws#lazy-consensus>
[6] http://openjdk.java.net/projects#project-committer
<http://openjdk.java.net/projects#project-committer>
