Re: Commit responsibilities and Lines of Defense

2011-02-22 Thread Bradford Wetmore
Kelly just wrote: It's not clear...and slightly augmented by the openjdk bugzilla. I think Andrew was referring to http://bugs.openjdk.java.net. I was. I'm not sure what else the phrase OpenJDK bug database would refer to. There were several bug systems mentioned in Kelly's

Re: Commit responsibilities and Lines of Defense

2011-02-22 Thread Andrew Haley
On 02/21/2011 08:01 PM, Kelly O'Hair wrote: On Feb 21, 2011, at 1:29 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: On 02/18/2011 10:09 PM, Kelly O'Hair wrote: It is clear to us that we cannot make the system entirely open, but we can provide a kind of portal (I hate that word), or view (a better word) into

Re: Commit responsibilities and Lines of Defense

2011-02-22 Thread Dr Andrew John Hughes
On 00:00 Tue 22 Feb , Bradford Wetmore wrote: Kelly just wrote: It's not clear...and slightly augmented by the openjdk bugzilla. I think Andrew was referring to http://bugs.openjdk.java.net. I was. I'm not sure what else the phrase OpenJDK bug database would refer

Re: Commit responsibilities and Lines of Defense

2011-02-22 Thread Ulf Zibis
Am 22.02.2011 13:14, schrieb Dr Andrew John Hughes: On 00:00 Tue 22 Feb , Bradford Wetmore wrote: So I take it the previous democratic choice of Bugzilla may be ignored? For now, patch submissions should continue to be submitted via bugzilla, and discussed with the appropriate

Re: Commit responsibilities and Lines of Defense

2011-02-22 Thread Kelly O'Hair
On Feb 22, 2011, at 2:16 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: On 02/21/2011 08:01 PM, Kelly O'Hair wrote: On Feb 21, 2011, at 1:29 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: On 02/18/2011 10:09 PM, Kelly O'Hair wrote: It is clear to us that we cannot make the system entirely open, but we can provide a kind of portal (I

Re: Commit responsibilities and Lines of Defense

2011-02-22 Thread Jonathan Gibbons
On 02/22/2011 08:41 AM, Kelly O'Hair wrote: On Feb 22, 2011, at 2:16 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: On 02/21/2011 08:01 PM, Kelly O'Hair wrote: On Feb 21, 2011, at 1:29 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: On 02/18/2011 10:09 PM, Kelly O'Hair wrote: It is clear to us that we cannot make the system entirely

Re: Commit responsibilities and Lines of Defense

2011-02-21 Thread Kelly O'Hair
On Feb 21, 2011, at 1:29 AM, Andrew Haley wrote: On 02/18/2011 10:09 PM, Kelly O'Hair wrote: But there have been some roadblocks for the open source community. It has been observed (for a long time now) that: * The Mercurial jcheck extension needs to be open sourced * The bug tracking

Re: Commit responsibilities and Lines of Defense

2011-02-21 Thread Dr Andrew John Hughes
On 18:29 Fri 18 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote: On Feb 18, 2011, at 4:29 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote: On 14:09 Fri 18 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote: snip But there have been some roadblocks for the open source community. It has been observed (for a long time now) that: * The

Re: Commit responsibilities and Lines of Defense

2011-02-21 Thread Kelly O'Hair
On Feb 21, 2011, at 1:33 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote: On 18:29 Fri 18 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote: On Feb 18, 2011, at 4:29 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote: On 14:09 Fri 18 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote: snip But there have been some roadblocks for the open source community. It

Re: Commit responsibilities and Lines of Defense

2011-02-21 Thread Brad Wetmore
Definitely. Making OpenJDK bug DB IDs usable in changesets would be a good start (probably involves jcheck...) I'll have to punt on that, someone else is working on it, but the intent is to have a completely open bug tracking system that also allows us link it with the internal Oracle bug

Re: Commit responsibilities and Lines of Defense

2011-02-21 Thread Dr Andrew John Hughes
On 18:08 Mon 21 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote: On Feb 21, 2011, at 1:33 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote: snip So this is going to be yet another system? What will happen to the existing pretty much unused OpenJDK bug database? It's not clear. The old Sun bugtraq system was

Re: Commit responsibilities and Lines of Defense

2011-02-21 Thread Dr Andrew John Hughes
On 18:26 Mon 21 Feb , Brad Wetmore wrote: Definitely. Making OpenJDK bug DB IDs usable in changesets would be a good start (probably involves jcheck...) I'll have to punt on that, someone else is working on it, but the intent is to have a completely open bug tracking system that

Re: Commit responsibilities and Lines of Defense

2011-02-21 Thread Kelly O'Hair
On Feb 21, 2011, at 6:28 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote: On 18:08 Mon 21 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote: On Feb 21, 2011, at 1:33 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote: snip So this is going to be yet another system? What will happen to the existing pretty much unused OpenJDK bug database?

Commit responsibilities and Lines of Defense

2011-02-18 Thread Kelly O'Hair
Excuse the long email, sometimes it can't be avoided. I've been asked to try and start up some discussions around how the OpenJDK development community can function better with regards to developer processes and what many of us call Lines of Defense or how we protect our repositories from

Re: Commit responsibilities and Lines of Defense

2011-02-18 Thread Dr Andrew John Hughes
On 14:09 Fri 18 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote: Excuse the long email, sometimes it can't be avoided. I much prefer long e-mails, especially ones with good news like this, to things happening behind closed doors :-) I've been asked to try and start up some discussions around how the OpenJDK

Re: Commit responsibilities and Lines of Defense

2011-02-18 Thread Kelly O'Hair
On Feb 18, 2011, at 4:29 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote: On 14:09 Fri 18 Feb , Kelly O'Hair wrote: snip But there have been some roadblocks for the open source community. It has been observed (for a long time now) that: * The Mercurial jcheck extension needs to be open sourced