RFR: 8294321: Fix typos in files under test/jdk/java, test/jdk/jdk, test/jdk/jni [v2]

Daniel Fuchs dfuchs at openjdk.org
Wed Sep 28 15:13:39 UTC 2022

On Wed, 28 Sep 2022 14:45:54 GMT, Michael Ernst <mernst at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Michael Ernst has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains six commits:
>>  - Reinstate typos in Apache code that is copied into the JDK
>>  - Merge ../jdk-openjdk into typos-typos
>>  - Remove file that was removed upstream
>>  - Fix inconsistency in capitalization
>>  - Undo change in zlip
>>  - Fix typos
> Regarding breaking up the pull request:
>  * No one has stated that this is actually necessary or given a guarantee that it will result in a merged pull request, only that it *might* finally free this pull request of red tape.
>  * Despite my repeated requests, no one has justified that *this particular pull request* needs the expertise of different teams.  The only reasons stated have been custom and bureaucracy.
>  * I have spent a nontrivial amount of time on these fixes.  There have been long delays, which forced me to resolve merge conflicts.  I was told that the changes are "mostly fine" without any indication of what is wrong.  I am reluctant to spend yet more time, only to later (maybe weeks later, as has already happened) find out that I still have to do something else or that all my effort was wasted.
>  * I was condescendingly told "We have discussed several times in the past ..." even though I was not privy to those discussions.  No pointer to documentation in the JDK itself, about pull requests, was given.
>  * No one has explained what to do.  "separate PRs by team" doesn't tell me what to do, since I don't see an org chart anywhere in the documentation that tells me what a "team" is.
> I'm sorry to state it so bluntly, but this is not a good look for the JDK team being welcoming to contributions.

Hi @mernst, sorry if this is how it appears. Pull requests that involve changes spanning a large set of files are notoriously harder to review since they require a reviewer from each different area to chime in. Basically you will need one reviewer from each of these areas:

-     client
-     compiler
-     core-libs
-     hotspot
-     i18n
-     javadoc
-     jmx
-     net
-     nio
-     security
-     serviceability

Jaikiran suggested to reduce the scope of this PR in his first comment:

as did several other reviewers. Sorry if the meaning (or reason) was not clear.

best regards,


PR: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk/pull/10029

More information about the compiler-dev mailing list