Format for JDK 6/7 changeset comments?

[Neal Gafter]

On Nov 9, 2007 11:33 AM, Andreas Sterbenz <Andreas.Sterbenz at sun.com> wrote:

> > In what sense is the location of the bug database better known than that
> > of the Mercurial repositories?
>
> Just thinking of Sun employees for now: management, support and services
> people, developers for other products that use the JDK, e.g. App Server or
> Access Manager.
>
> Any of them may need to get in touch with the code reviewers in case the
> primary author of the fix is unavailable. All of them know where to find
> the bug database but probably won't know the magic URL for the correct JDK
> repository.
>
> There is clearly some information that should be in the changeset comments
>  because that can make life more efficient for us JDK developers when we
> crawl around in the repository. Primary author, bug number, and synopsis -
> as we have in the SCCS comments today - seems sufficient to me. As long as
> I can find everything else in the bug database, if I need it.


Perhaps Sun's internal tools need to be modified so they can pull some
information out of the change sets.

Anyway, the main issue is that there is a lot of value in having all
> relevant information about a bug stored in ONE central place, which is the
> bug database. If you feel differently, then we'll have to agree to
> disagree.


If the result is a situation that is convenient for you at the expense of
inconvenience for outside openjdk developers, agreeing to disagree isn't a
very palatable solution.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/discuss/attachments/20071109/daea991e/attachment.html>