Likewise - is it possible to get edit access?
Cheers,
Martijn
On 21 November 2014 at 20:46, Patrick Reinhart wrote:
> Hi Magnus,
>
> > A recurring theme in the build-dev list is confusion on which platforms
> it is possible to build OpenJDK. Unfortunately, information about this has
> not been
Hi Brenden,
Oracle's installer is separate from OpenJDK itself, I'm afraid you'll also
need to report this issue to bugs.sun.com!
Cheers,
Martijn
On 14 February 2014 20:48, Brenden Towey wrote:
> Also, I have another gripe. I was reminded of this as I was installing
> the new Java 8 bits, an
Hi Brenden,
Thanks for reporting this issue, but it should be submitted via bugs.sun.com:-).
Cheers,
Martijn
On 14 February 2014 18:54, Brenden Towey wrote:
> I'd like to make a bug report. Java has had for a while now a bug in its
> regex system which I'd like to see fixed.
>
> The short of
It's definitely a blocker for a few folks. Yesterday I walked someone
through the full process of submitting a bug with a patch and was forced to
admit that it would be faster to just try and persuade an existing person
with the author+ role to submit the bug and apply the one-line patch.
Cheers,
Hi Christian,
This was discussed at FOSDEM (and in the months leading up to it). We are
going to start a prototype for this idea in the LJC and gather
requirements, look at security implications etc.
We are still in the process of securing finding for some hosting etc but
will get started shorty
Hi all,
I've written up the summary of this thread as part of the pre-review
checklist here:
http://java.net/projects/jugs/pages/StringBufferToStringBuilderReplacements
Any comments/questions/feedback is welcome!
Cheers,
Martijn
On 10 May 2012 12:55, Joel Borggren-Franck wrote:
> Hi,
>
> "Tob
eers,
> Tobias
>
> - Reply message -
> Von: "Martijn Verburg"
> An: "Mike Duigou"
> Cc: "jdk8-dev"
> Betreff: Potential StringBuffer to StringBuilder clean-up (where warranted)
> Datum: Fr., Mai. 4, 2012 18:07
>
>
> Hi Mike,
&
er to StringBuilder conversions are an excellent contribution.
>
> On May 4 2012, at 07:17 , Martijn Verburg wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Stefan Reich has submitted a patch to the Adopt OpenJDK program which
>> we're looking to pre-review that converts (in theory, all easi
Hi all,
Stefan Reich has submitted a patch to the Adopt OpenJDK program which
we're looking to pre-review that converts (in theory, all easily and
automatically convertible) uses of StringBuffer into StringBuilder.
The motivation is to bring some performance benefits where
synchronization is not r
though in AWT
> (thousands...) so any changes there would be better coordinated with the
> AWT folks.
>
> Looking forward to the event!
>
> s'marks
>
> [1] https://wikis.oracle.com/**display/OpenJDK/JDK8+Warnings+**
> Cleanup+Day+%282011-12-01%29<https://wikis.oracle.c
Hi Henri,
I believe so yes, Fredrik does have a Mac after all ;-)
Cheers,
Martijn
On 21 April 2012 12:34, Henri Gomez wrote:
> New build system has been tested allready on OSX ?
>
> Le 21 avr. 2012 à 09:10, Fredrik Öhrström a écrit :
>
> > For the new build you have to explicitly choose relea
Hi Andrew,
Ill be on the openjdk channel on, thanks for helping! and I know what you
mean, I have ~65 patches to process from Jan :-)
Cheers,
Martijn
On Friday, 20 April 2012, Andrew Hughes wrote:
> - Original Message -
> > Hi all,
> >
> > FYI - We'll be holding another compiler warnin
non controversial (and the
> area owner agrees).
>
> Martijn,
> I'm based in Dublin Ireland. Will be online in your timezone if you need
> to bounce any ideas/questions.
>
> -Chris.
>
>
> On 19/04/12 13:32, Martijn Verburg wrote:
>
>> Thanks Stuar
x27;marks
>
> [1] https://wikis.oracle.com/**display/OpenJDK/JDK8+Warnings+**
> Cleanup+Day+%282011-12-01%29<https://wikis.oracle.com/display/OpenJDK/JDK8+Warnings+Cleanup+Day+%282011-12-01%29>
>
> On 4/18/12 2:49 AM, Martijn Verburg wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>>
>>
Hi all,
Just to follow up on this, we'll likely co-ordinate via the wiki as per
last time, it seemed to work very well (thanks Stuart for setting that up
last time).
Cheers,
Martijn
On 17 April 2012 23:53, Martijn Verburg wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> FYI - We'll be holding anothe
Hi all,
FYI - We'll be holding another compiler warnings squashing day on the 23rd
of April, 1830+ BST. A few of the 'instructors' (we use the term loosely
as we're all still learning) will pop up on IRC, but we hope to keep our
chatter down to a minimum.
As before we'll package up the patches i
Hi Mathias
Hi Mark and Martijn,
>
> I've been away for a few days so I didn't get the chance to reply back
> until today.
>
> I think it is great that the Java User Groups wants to help out in testing
> JDK 8. I'll look into a proposed date for the M7 milestone and will get
> back to you.
>
> Mart
Hi all,
2012/4/4 13:43 -0700, martijnverb...@gmail.com:
> > One of the areas the JUGs would like to help with is to rally the
> prominent OSS
> > projects to test OpenJDK 8 early (try to avoid Lucene type issues). We
> were
> > originally thinking about a simple wiki table ticking off projects vs
Hi Mathias!
On Wednesday, 4 April 2012, wrote:
> 2012/4/4 9:40 -0700, mathias.axels...@oracle.com :
> > ...
> >
> > First of all I'd like to propose some dates for the implementation
> milestones
> > for JDK 8 so that there are some high-level buckets that can be targeted
> for
> > delivering fea
I'll add this to the notes, thanks John.
On 31 January 2012 23:25, John Rose wrote:
> It only strengthen's your already unassailable conclusion, but I'll add:
> ... may have a reference to an "enclosing instance" +[and/or references to
> captured local variable values] ... anonymous classes have
Hi Stuart,
Thanks very much again for helping out on the day, it certainly saved
a few of the devs
from getting permanently stuck!
> Ah, it looks like you guys wrapped up while I was taking my lunch break. I
> hope your hack session was fun and productive.
It was! Mike (Michael Barker) is gathe
>> On 31/01/2012 00:08, Stuart Marks wrote:
>>>
>>> (Crap. I've just realized that I never pushed Deepak Bhole's java.text
>>> patches from December. To avoid conflicts, I'd suggest avoiding changes
>>> to
>>> src/share/classes/java/text. Other areas should be fair game.)
>>
On 31/01/2012 00:08, Stuart Marks wrote:
>
> (Crap. I've just realized that I never pushed Deepak Bhole's java.text
> patches from December. To avoid conflicts, I'd suggest avoiding changes
> to
> src/share/classes/java/text. Other areas should be fair game.)
Hi all,
Some corrections in-line (error between chair and keyboard ;p)
On 31 January 2012 10:01, Martijn Verburg wrote:
>> I've added an awk script to the main Warnings Cleanup page [2] that does
>> some analysis of warnings from a build log. I used this script to keep track
&
Hi all,
>> On 31/01/2012 00:08, Stuart Marks wrote:
>>>
>>> (Crap. I've just realized that I never pushed Deepak Bhole's java.text
>>> patches from December. To avoid conflicts, I'd suggest avoiding changes to
>>> src/share/classes/java/text. Other areas should be fair game.)
>>
>> Another one is
Hi Stuart,
> I don't know if anyone from Oracle will be involved in this. I can try to
> hang out on the #openjdk IRC channel, and I can review and push a couple of
> the patches if you need help doing so. What time do you guys think you'll be
> online?
We'll be on-line around 1830+ GMT, on the 3
Hi all,
We've finally managed to find a space that lets us stay late enough in
the evening (not everyone has the hardware to build the openjdk
quickly ;p) of the 31st of Jan and so the LJC is going to host another
OpenJDK hack day. This will basically be a repeat of the last one,
that is, focusing
>>> Thanks for the set-up instructions, between that and the jtreg site I
>>> was able to get them running.
>>>
>>> I'll probably have more specific questions later on, but in the mean
>>> time I'd like to be able to
>>> contribute some documentation steps so that especially when community
>>> enth
>> Thanks for the set-up instructions, between that and the jtreg site I
>> was able to get them running.
>>
>> I'll probably have more specific questions later on, but in the mean
>> time I'd like to be able to
>> contribute some documentation steps so that especially when community
>> enthusiasts
>> Martijn,
>>
>> There were a number of surprises on Warnings Day last week.
>> One was the amount of enthusiasm. Another was the difficulty of
>> staying within the prescribed bounds, such as "no public API changes".
>>
>> Which brings me to a suggestion I've been meaning to make for a
>> while,
Glad to hear there was a good result out of it - we certainly learned
a lot and had a good deal of fun as well! - M
On 9 December 2011 04:56, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
> Wow, most impressive!
>
> -- Jon
>
>
> On 12/08/2011 08:12 PM, Xiomara Jayasena wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Last week we held [1] the
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I think the experiment was pretty successful the other night and Mike
>> and I have also figured out some ways to
>> streamline the process even further for future events (pre-built VMs
>> with the initial build already executed once
>> work pretty well if you're running adequate h
Hi all,
I think the experiment was pretty successful the other night and Mike
and I have also figured out some ways to
streamline the process even further for future events (pre-built VMs
with the initial build already executed once
work pretty well if you're running adequate hardware).
We're kee
Hi Alan/All,
On 3 December 2011 15:36, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 03/12/2011 11:27, Martijn Verburg wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> So the recent warnings clean up exercise got me thinking about the
>> approach we took and how we could make it safer by applying/runnin
On 3 December 2011 15:36, Alan Bateman wrote:
> On 03/12/2011 11:27, Martijn Verburg wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> So the recent warnings clean up exercise got me thinking about the
>> approach we took and how we could make it safer by applying/running
>> tes
> On 3 December 2011 11:34, Mario Torre wrote:
> Il giorno 03/dic/2011, alle ore 12:27, Martijn Verburg ha scritto:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> So the recent warnings clean up exercise got me thinking about the
>> approach we took and how we could make it safer by applying/run
Hi all,
So the recent warnings clean up exercise got me thinking about the
approach we took and how we could make it safer by applying/running
tests in some of these areas. I'm very new to the OpenJDK, but I
figure there must be a suite of tests (for the TCK if nothing else).
Is that the set of te
Hi Sherman,
In order to keep this change within the scope of the intentions of the
exercise I'm going to revert that section to what it was (I'll re-spin a
patch). At this stage I won't add a @SuppressWarnings as I think this
should be avoidable once it's looked at again in a little more depth.
Hi Sherman,
Thanks for sending that through - very interesting. I'll let Prasanna
know as well, especially with regards to the performance and GC
implications, I'm kicking myself for not having picked up on at least
on of those when reviewing :(.
I'll re-spin a patch (adding a @SuppressWarnings w
Hi John,
> Presently we are aiming at removing warnings with no changes to semantics
> (i.e., bytecodes).
>
> I'll risk stating the obvious: If we have 900 warnings removals, and 30 of
> them remove warnings by changing code (to call a non-deprecated API
> element), and 1 of those 30 introduces a
40 matches
Mail list logo
