Adopt OpenJDK @ BG JUG, Step 2

Tue Apr 1 21:27:20 UTC 2014

+1
These are good guidelines, its always good to split commits into smaller
units.

Looking forward to some interesting contributions from all.

Cheers,
Mani

On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 8:32 PM, Mario Torre
<neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com>wrote:

> Hello Ivan,
>
> I think it would make sense to split the patch in two, since even if the
> class is the same, they are really two separate "issues".
>
> I think the switch part of your changeset is not really necessary, since
> the style would be corrected by adding just the missing parenthesis. If you
> still want to use the switch, then please add a break after "default" and
> keep the label on their own lines and align the break 4 at spaces (I think
> this is the recommended style, I may be wrong though).
>
> Cheers, and welcome :)
> Mario
> Il 01/apr/2014 20:42 "Ivan St. Ivanov" <ivan.st.ivanov at gmail.com> ha
> scritto:
>
> > Hey Martijn,
> >
> > Here it is: http://www.
> > dmitryalexandrov.net/webrev/
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Ivan
> > On Apr 1, 2014 6:51 PM, "Martijn Verburg" <martijnverburg at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Ivan,
> > >
> > > Are you able to host it in a non Google Drive location?  Unfortunately
> > > Google Drive doesn't act as a 'real' web server and so you get the raw
> > HTML
> > > as opposed to the output displayed.  I/we should then be able to give
> > some
> > > advice on the suitability.
> > >
> > > On the other question, it's usually best to have one patch per issue.
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Martijn
> > >
> > >
> > > On 1 April 2014 16:45, Ivan St. Ivanov <ivan.st.ivanov at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi Rory,
> > >>
> > >> Yes, I have read it. I am asking something different. My question is
> > >> whether, provided we follow the process, the type of change would be
> > >> accepted. Or it would get rejected only because it does not bring any
> > >> tangible value to the project.
> > >>
> > >> Cheers,
> > >> Ivan
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, Apr 1, 2014 at 6:30 PM, Rory O'Donnell Oracle, Dublin Ireland
> <
> > >> rory.odonnell at oracle.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> >  Hi Ivan,
> > >> >
> > >> > Did you have a chance to read Martijn's New Contributor wiki page
> > here<
> > >> https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/Adoption/New+Contributor>
> > >> >
> > >> > It describes step by step how a new contributor should get involved.
> > >> >
> > >> > Rgds, Rory
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On 31/03/2014 20:39, Ivan St. Ivanov wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Hi folks,
> > >> >
> > >> > I am Ivan from the Bulgarian Java User Group. We started end of last
> > >> year
> > >> > our Adopt OpenJDK efforts. As proposed on the wiki, we started with
> > >> initial
> > >> > presentation of the concepts to the JUG. We had a dedicated JUG
> > meeting
> > >> and
> > >> > two talks by Mani from LJC on a couple of conferences in Sofia. Then
> > we
> > >> set
> > >> > up Open JDK VM, that we shared to be used by our JUG members. In
> fact
> > I
> > >> > think that Mani's quick start document is referring to our VMs for
> > >> > download. Last month we had Lambdas workshop in the JUG, where along
> > >> with a
> > >> > presentation of the great new feature in Java 8, we did a hands-on
> lab
> > >> on
> > >> > the well known Lambda tutorial.
> > >> >
> > >> > Now, it's time for the next step. According to the wiki, a good
> thing
> > to
> > >> > start with is doing some small fixes like applying project coin or
> > >> lambdas
> > >> > to some JDK methods. I decided to set up locally Java 9. Earlier
> this
> > >> week
> > >> > I met (guess whom?) Mani at JavaLand and he advised me to run
> > IntelliJ's
> > >> > code analysis to find some candidates for such small fixes. Based on
> > >> that I
> > >> > created a really small patch, just to walk down the path, before
> going
> > >> to
> > >> > the JUG. Here is a link to the webrev archive that I created:
> > >> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B0zkCj4qHzcrR1k3TC1Qd3B4RWM.
> > >> >
> > >> > So, I have the following questions:
> > >> >
> > >> > - Do you think that such type of change would be welcome? If not,
> > would
> > >> you
> > >> > recommend what should we do before going to JBUG? If yes, we will go
> > on
> > >> in
> > >> > our JUG and find some other such small issues and even add test
> cases
> > >> for
> > >> > them
> > >> > - Would you recommend having one big patch for all the changes that
> we
> > >> > find, or you think it is better to have one patch per issue
> > >> >
> > >> > Special thanks to Mani for all the help that he's been giving our
> JUG
> > in
> > >> > the last few months!
> > >> >
> > >> > Cheers,
> > >> > Ivan
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Rgds,Rory O'Donnell
> > >> > Quality Engineering Manager
> > >> > Oracle EMEA , Dublin, Ireland
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> >
>

-- 
@theNeomatrix369 <http://twitter.com/theNeomatrix369>*  |  **Blog
<http://neomatrix369.wordpress.com>**  |  *LJC Associate & LJC Advocate
(@adoptopenjdk & @adoptajsr programs)
*Meet-a-Project - *MutabilityDetector<https://github.com/MutabilityDetector>*
|  **Bitbucket <https://bitbucket.org/neomatrix369>* * |  **Github
<https://github.com/neomatrix369>* * |  **LinkedIn
<http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/mani-sarkar/71/a77/39b>*
*Come to Devoxx UK 2014:* http://www.devoxx.co.uk/

*Don't chase success, rather aim for "Excellence", and success will come
chasing after you!*