Publishing code reviews

Tim O'Brien tobrien at
Thu Oct 11 23:38:16 UTC 2007

On 10/11/07, Peter B. Kessler <Peter.Kessler at> wrote:
> Tim O'Brien wrote:
> >
> >
> > On 10/11/07, *Mark Reinhold* <mr at <mailto:mr at>> wrote:
> >
> >      >    Would we need to somehow filter out the webrevs which
> >      >    contain closed sources?
> >
> >     Yes.  That's a Sun-internal problem, though, so let's discuss it
> >     internally.
> >
> >
> >
> > That's interesting, what sort of code is closed?   Is there ever going
> > to be a case where a webrev contains certain sections that are public
> > and certain sections that are private?   since you mentioned it on a
> > public list, could you give us a sense of what the public is missing?
> Think of the code we can't release because of the encumberances.
> If we have to make changes in that code, we need to get reviews,
> but we can't ask the community for help with those reviews.
> Clearly the less code we have that we can't put in the open the
> better.  But as long as that set is non-empty, it's something we
> have to deal with, internally.

Ok, so just to clear it up for the non-Sun folks this would be things like
the font rasterization stuff that is still encumbered.   Ideally the
encumbered code shrinks over time, and there's less of a chance of a webrev
spanning encumbered and non-encumbered code.  I'd assume that you'll
continue to use the internal review systems just for those code reviews.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the discuss mailing list