----- Original Message ----- > On 22/01/16 14:50, Andrew Hughes wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > >> On 21/01/16 15:20, Severin Gehwolf wrote: > >>> Thanks, Jaroslav. Any JDK 8 reviewer willing to have a look at this? > >> Looks good to me Severin. > >> > > It looks good to me also; I already included the equivalent change (using > > the OpenJDK 7 libraries rather than Collectors) in the backport to 7. > > > > I can push this, but I think you still need an 8u maintainer to approve it. > > > > Also, I feel it should maybe go to 9 first. Does anyone know when the > > security patches will appear there? > January CPU patches are already in the JDK 9 dev forest. >
Ah is this the usual place they appear first? I was looking in jdk9/jdk9. > Yes - please fix this issue in JDK 9 first as per rule 1: > http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/groundrules.html > > In a nutshell, produce a JDK 9 webrev, send it to > serviceability-dev@openjdk.java.net for review and once reviewed, push > to jdk9/dev forest. Once done, you can then submit a JDK 8u integration > approval request. I've applied Severin's patch to 9 and it applies as-is, once shuffled. Are the existing reviews sufficient? Jaroslav, Daniel & I have all OKed it already. I do think the copyright notice should read 'Red Hat' and I've raised this with Severin. > > regards, > Sean. > > > >> best regards, > >> > >> -- daniel > > Thanks, > > -- Andrew :) Senior Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) PGP Key: ed25519/35964222 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net) Fingerprint = 5132 579D D154 0ED2 3E04 C5A0 CFDA 0F9B 3596 4222
