From iris at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 3 05:46:59 2020 From: iris at openjdk.java.net (Iris Clark) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 05:46:59 GMT Subject: RFR: JBS section In-Reply-To: <67kuoRasMJDuIF1iQpBegJH1KLHAVU-RzrgYraEpJ_o=.8786ae78-f1e4-452d-ac92-65ff8b084812@github.com> References: <67kuoRasMJDuIF1iQpBegJH1KLHAVU-RzrgYraEpJ_o=.8786ae78-f1e4-452d-ac92-65ff8b084812@github.com> Message-ID: <-Ru8towaORLIt83WJB1MON9QUJnYHOh_fwRqD-ihpoI=.a0423005-9f44-4159-a2f9-f3455b6eb64e@github.com> On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 03:55:42 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: > Expanding the JBS section with two parts: How to fix an incorrect backport creation, and resolved-incomplete This is a good description of recovery for a non-standard scenario. ------------- Marked as reviewed by iris (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/36 From dholmes at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 3 06:00:10 2020 From: dholmes at openjdk.java.net (David Holmes) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 06:00:10 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section for newcomers [v7] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 03:51:19 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: >> Added a section to the introduction to set the expectations for new developers in the OpenJDK. >> >> I also moved the mail list section up since it's also relevant in this context and should (imho) be the first thing to learn about when thinking about joining the community. > > Jesper Wilhelmsson has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > Less choking on coffee Marked as reviewed by dholmes (no project role). ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38 From alanb at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 3 08:36:02 2020 From: alanb at openjdk.java.net (Alan Bateman) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 08:36:02 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section for newcomers [v7] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 03:51:19 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: >> Added a section to the introduction to set the expectations for new developers in the OpenJDK. >> >> I also moved the mail list section up since it's also relevant in this context and should (imho) be the first thing to learn about when thinking about joining the community. > > Jesper Wilhelmsson has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > Less choking on coffee src/index.md line 35: > 33: ### 2. Socialize your change > 34: > 35: Once the OCA is signed, please restrain your urge to create a PR just a little while longer. In order to prepare the community for your patch, please socialize your idea on the relevant [mailing lists](#mailing-lists). To understand the criteria by which your patch is going to be judged, please read [_Why is My Change Rejected?_](#why-is-my-change-rejected) below. In short, hidden constraints and assumptions, stability and quality, maintainability, compatibility, and conformance to specifications must be considered before your PR is ready to be submitted. If you don't understand the constraints for acceptance, you might be surprised when your PR is rejected. I think proposals for API additions need to be called out here as a good example of something that needs discussion, and maybe agreement in principle, before going near code. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38 From jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 3 11:07:59 2020 From: jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 11:07:59 GMT Subject: Integrated: JBS section In-Reply-To: <67kuoRasMJDuIF1iQpBegJH1KLHAVU-RzrgYraEpJ_o=.8786ae78-f1e4-452d-ac92-65ff8b084812@github.com> References: <67kuoRasMJDuIF1iQpBegJH1KLHAVU-RzrgYraEpJ_o=.8786ae78-f1e4-452d-ac92-65ff8b084812@github.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 03:55:42 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: > Expanding the JBS section with two parts: How to fix an incorrect backport creation, and resolved-incomplete This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: dbc9a9ad Author: Jesper Wilhelmsson URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/commit/dbc9a9ad Stats: 42 lines in 1 file changed: 41 ins; 0 del; 1 mod JBS section Reviewed-by: iris ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/36 From jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 3 11:20:15 2020 From: jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 11:20:15 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section for newcomers [v8] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Added a section to the introduction to set the expectations for new developers in the OpenJDK. > > I also moved the mail list section up since it's also relevant in this context and should (imho) be the first thing to learn about when thinking about joining the community. Jesper Wilhelmsson has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Added text about API changes ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38/files/cd07742c..78e00c04 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=guide&pr=38&range=07 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=guide&pr=38&range=06-07 Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide pull/38/head:pull/38 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38 From jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 3 11:20:16 2020 From: jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 11:20:16 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section for newcomers [v7] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 08:33:34 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: >> Jesper Wilhelmsson has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: >> >> Less choking on coffee > > src/index.md line 35: > >> 33: ### 2. Socialize your change >> 34: >> 35: Once the OCA is signed, please restrain your urge to create a PR just a little while longer. In order to prepare the community for your patch, please socialize your idea on the relevant [mailing lists](#mailing-lists). To understand the criteria by which your patch is going to be judged, please read [_Why is My Change Rejected?_](#why-is-my-change-rejected) below. In short, hidden constraints and assumptions, stability and quality, maintainability, compatibility, and conformance to specifications must be considered before your PR is ready to be submitted. If you don't understand the constraints for acceptance, you might be surprised when your PR is rejected. > > I think proposals for API additions need to be called out here as a good example of something that needs discussion, and maybe agreement in principle, before going near code. I've added a sentence to hi-light API changes. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38 From ihse at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 3 13:10:02 2020 From: ihse at openjdk.java.net (Magnus Ihse Bursie) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 13:10:02 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section for newcomers [v8] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 11:20:15 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: >> Added a section to the introduction to set the expectations for new developers in the OpenJDK. >> >> I also moved the mail list section up since it's also relevant in this context and should (imho) be the first thing to learn about when thinking about joining the community. > > Jesper Wilhelmsson has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > Added text about API changes Looks good. Let's get this into the real world now! :) ------------- Marked as reviewed by ihse (no project role). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38 From alanb at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 3 13:13:03 2020 From: alanb at openjdk.java.net (Alan Bateman) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 13:13:03 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section for newcomers [v8] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4ApJ7I6qng344MzYfhk8y_w0sj6C2NrzIUJPxtGGeVs=.88007969-7796-432d-96e0-8774f71d8552@github.com> On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 11:20:15 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: >> Added a section to the introduction to set the expectations for new developers in the OpenJDK. >> >> I also moved the mail list section up since it's also relevant in this context and should (imho) be the first thing to learn about when thinking about joining the community. > > Jesper Wilhelmsson has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > Added text about API changes src/index.md line 35: > 33: ### 2. Socialize your change > 34: > 35: Once the OCA is signed, please restrain your urge to create a PR just a little while longer. In order to prepare the community for your patch, please socialize your idea on the relevant [mailing lists](#mailing-lists). Almost all changes, and in particular any API changes, must go this route and have a broad agreement in place before there is any point in presenting code. To understand the criteria by which your patch is going to be judged, please read [_Why is My Change Rejected?_](#why-is-my-change-rejected) below. In short, hidden constraints and assumptions, stability and quality, maintainability, compatibility, and conformance to specifications must be considered before your PR is ready to be submitted. If you don't understand the constraints for acceptance, you might be surprised when your PR is rejected. Thanks for the update. One small suggestion is to say "proposals for new APIs" rather than "any API change". ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38 From ihse at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 3 13:29:03 2020 From: ihse at openjdk.java.net (Magnus Ihse Bursie) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 13:29:03 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section for newcomers [v8] In-Reply-To: <4ApJ7I6qng344MzYfhk8y_w0sj6C2NrzIUJPxtGGeVs=.88007969-7796-432d-96e0-8774f71d8552@github.com> References: <4ApJ7I6qng344MzYfhk8y_w0sj6C2NrzIUJPxtGGeVs=.88007969-7796-432d-96e0-8774f71d8552@github.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 13:10:02 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: >> Jesper Wilhelmsson has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: >> >> Added text about API changes > > src/index.md line 35: > >> 33: ### 2. Socialize your change >> 34: >> 35: Once the OCA is signed, please restrain your urge to create a PR just a little while longer. In order to prepare the community for your patch, please socialize your idea on the relevant [mailing lists](#mailing-lists). Almost all changes, and in particular any API changes, must go this route and have a broad agreement in place before there is any point in presenting code. To understand the criteria by which your patch is going to be judged, please read [_Why is My Change Rejected?_](#why-is-my-change-rejected) below. In short, hidden constraints and assumptions, stability and quality, maintainability, compatibility, and conformance to specifications must be considered before your PR is ready to be submitted. If you don't understand the constraints for acceptance, you might be surprised when your PR is rejected. > > Thanks for the update. One small suggestion is to say "proposals for new APIs" rather than "any API change". That seems like it narrows down the criteria. Maybe Random J Hacker only wants to add a getFronglified() to java.lang.String -- since that is not a new API, he does not think it necessary to discuss it first..? I'd say keep it as it is; it's better to send one too many to the mailing list rather than one too few. And also, it's better to actually get this document out to the public. We can refine it iteratively if we discover that people misunderstand it. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38 From alanb at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 3 14:05:05 2020 From: alanb at openjdk.java.net (Alan Bateman) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:05:05 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section for newcomers [v8] In-Reply-To: References: <4ApJ7I6qng344MzYfhk8y_w0sj6C2NrzIUJPxtGGeVs=.88007969-7796-432d-96e0-8774f71d8552@github.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 13:26:17 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> src/index.md line 35: >> >>> 33: ### 2. Socialize your change >>> 34: >>> 35: Once the OCA is signed, please restrain your urge to create a PR just a little while longer. In order to prepare the community for your patch, please socialize your idea on the relevant [mailing lists](#mailing-lists). Almost all changes, and in particular any API changes, must go this route and have a broad agreement in place before there is any point in presenting code. To understand the criteria by which your patch is going to be judged, please read [_Why is My Change Rejected?_](#why-is-my-change-rejected) below. In short, hidden constraints and assumptions, stability and quality, maintainability, compatibility, and conformance to specifications must be considered before your PR is ready to be submitted. If you don't understand the constraints for acceptance, you might be surprised when your PR is rejected. >> >> Thanks for the update. One small suggestion is to say "proposals for new APIs" rather than "any API change". > > That seems like it narrows down the criteria. Maybe Random J Hacker only wants to add a getFronglified() to java.lang.String -- since that is not a new API, he does not think it necessary to discuss it first..? > > I'd say keep it as it is; it's better to send one too many to the mailing list rather than one too few. > > And also, it's better to actually get this document out to the public. We can refine it iteratively if we discover that people misunderstand it. String::getFronglified would be a new API, best to get agreement on the mailing list before proposing a patch. It's very possible that the API has been discussed and rejected many times or it has interactions with many other areas of the platform. To some extent we have a bit of a cultural clash here in that many developers are used to "code first" and use the PR to start the discussion. For new standard or JDK-specific APIs, this might be the first 1% of the work. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38 From jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 3 14:27:17 2020 From: jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:27:17 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section for newcomers [v9] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Added a section to the introduction to set the expectations for new developers in the OpenJDK. > > I also moved the mail list section up since it's also relevant in this context and should (imho) be the first thing to learn about when thinking about joining the community. Jesper Wilhelmsson has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Updated text ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38/files/78e00c04..2a45b7b1 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=guide&pr=38&range=08 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=guide&pr=38&range=07-08 Stats: 2 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 2 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide pull/38/head:pull/38 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38 From github.com+1709517+mariusvolkhart at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 3 14:27:17 2020 From: github.com+1709517+mariusvolkhart at openjdk.java.net (Marius Volkhart) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:27:17 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section for newcomers [v6] In-Reply-To: References: <8J5uQNRwmsrIfbKbuy01TZCGL2pVWQg_LZBZUHqPUB4=.3decc14b-f1d4-42ff-8337-e265261912e8@github.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 19 Nov 2020 17:24:27 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: >> Maybe a better suggestion is to open the PR in draft mode? This means tthere is no requirement for a JBS issue number, and no RFR mail will be sent out -- but the bot still populates the proper tags, if I recall correctly. >> >> I agree that getting assistance from the bot in finding a reasonable starting set of lists is good support for newcomers (even if it might need adjustment; but someone on the targeted lists can certainly help with that). > > There's this section in the Guide that intends to help finding the right list: https://openjdk.java.net/guide/#code-owners > @MariusVolkhart Is there information missing there that would have made it easier for you to find the right list? @JesperIRL No, it's all there. Thanks! ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38 From jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 3 14:32:02 2020 From: jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:32:02 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section for newcomers [v8] In-Reply-To: References: <4ApJ7I6qng344MzYfhk8y_w0sj6C2NrzIUJPxtGGeVs=.88007969-7796-432d-96e0-8774f71d8552@github.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:02:51 GMT, Alan Bateman wrote: >> That seems like it narrows down the criteria. Maybe Random J Hacker only wants to add a getFronglified() to java.lang.String -- since that is not a new API, he does not think it necessary to discuss it first..? >> >> I'd say keep it as it is; it's better to send one too many to the mailing list rather than one too few. >> >> And also, it's better to actually get this document out to the public. We can refine it iteratively if we discover that people misunderstand it. > > String::getFronglified would be a new API, best to get agreement on the mailing list before proposing a patch. It's very possible that the API has been discussed and rejected many times or it has interactions with many other areas of the platform. To some extent we have a bit of a cultural clash here in that many developers are used to "code first" and use the PR to start the discussion. For new standard or JDK-specific APIs, this might be the first 1% of the work. I tend to agree with Magnus here. Don't we want to cover changes that removes a part of the API or just changes the behavior of some method? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38 From lancea at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 3 15:45:02 2020 From: lancea at openjdk.java.net (Lance Andersen) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 15:45:02 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section for newcomers [v9] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:27:17 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: >> Added a section to the introduction to set the expectations for new developers in the OpenJDK. >> >> I also moved the mail list section up since it's also relevant in this context and should (imho) be the first thing to learn about when thinking about joining the community. > > Jesper Wilhelmsson has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > Updated text Looks good to me ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38 From smarks at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 3 17:04:03 2020 From: smarks at openjdk.java.net (Stuart Marks) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 17:04:03 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section for newcomers [v9] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:27:17 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: >> Added a section to the introduction to set the expectations for new developers in the OpenJDK. >> >> I also moved the mail list section up since it's also relevant in this context and should (imho) be the first thing to learn about when thinking about joining the community. > > Jesper Wilhelmsson has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > Updated text Marked as reviewed by smarks (no project role). ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38 From smarks at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 3 17:10:01 2020 From: smarks at openjdk.java.net (Stuart Marks) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 17:10:01 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section for newcomers [v8] In-Reply-To: References: <4ApJ7I6qng344MzYfhk8y_w0sj6C2NrzIUJPxtGGeVs=.88007969-7796-432d-96e0-8774f71d8552@github.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:29:32 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: >> String::getFronglified would be a new API, best to get agreement on the mailing list before proposing a patch. It's very possible that the API has been discussed and rejected many times or it has interactions with many other areas of the platform. To some extent we have a bit of a cultural clash here in that many developers are used to "code first" and use the PR to start the discussion. For new standard or JDK-specific APIs, this might be the first 1% of the work. > > I tend to agree with Magnus here. Don't we want to cover changes that removes a part of the API or just changes the behavior of some method? I think "any API change" is preferable to "new API" -- I could easily imagine somebody coming along and saying, "All I want to do is to have this method return null instead of throwing NPE. That's not a new API." There's a larger discussion to be had somewhere else about what constitutes an API change, in particular that some behavior changes *are* API changes. Meanwhile "any API change" is probably sufficiently inclusive for now. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38 From alanb at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 3 17:10:01 2020 From: alanb at openjdk.java.net (Alan Bateman) Date: Thu, 3 Dec 2020 17:10:01 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section for newcomers [v8] In-Reply-To: References: <4ApJ7I6qng344MzYfhk8y_w0sj6C2NrzIUJPxtGGeVs=.88007969-7796-432d-96e0-8774f71d8552@github.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 17:06:16 GMT, Stuart Marks wrote: >> I tend to agree with Magnus here. Don't we want to cover changes that removes a part of the API or just changes the behavior of some method? > > I think "any API change" is preferable to "new API" -- I could easily imagine somebody coming along and saying, "All I want to do is to have this method return null instead of throwing NPE. That's not a new API." There's a larger discussion to be had somewhere else about what constitutes an API change, in particular that some behavior changes *are* API changes. Meanwhile "any API change" is probably sufficiently inclusive for now. Okay but Magnus's example is a new API. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38 From iris at openjdk.java.net Mon Dec 7 18:36:26 2020 From: iris at openjdk.java.net (Iris Clark) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 18:36:26 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section for newcomers [v9] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 3 Dec 2020 14:27:17 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: >> Added a section to the introduction to set the expectations for new developers in the OpenJDK. >> >> I also moved the mail list section up since it's also relevant in this context and should (imho) be the first thing to learn about when thinking about joining the community. > > Jesper Wilhelmsson has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > Updated text Marked as reviewed by iris (Reviewer). ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38 From jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net Mon Dec 7 18:49:18 2020 From: jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 18:49:18 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section for newcomers [v9] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 18:33:53 GMT, Iris Clark wrote: >> Jesper Wilhelmsson has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: >> >> Updated text > > Marked as reviewed by iris (Reviewer). Thank you, all reviewers! ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38 From jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net Mon Dec 7 18:49:19 2020 From: jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 18:49:19 GMT Subject: Integrated: Added section for newcomers In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 04:26:31 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: > Added a section to the introduction to set the expectations for new developers in the OpenJDK. > > I also moved the mail list section up since it's also relevant in this context and should (imho) be the first thing to learn about when thinking about joining the community. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 04211618 Author: Jesper Wilhelmsson URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/commit/04211618 Stats: 162 lines in 2 files changed: 115 ins; 47 del; 0 mod Added section for newcomers Reviewed-by: ihse, smarks, dholmes, iris ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/38 From jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net Mon Dec 7 22:53:22 2020 From: jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Mon, 7 Dec 2020 22:53:22 GMT Subject: RFR: Reworked guide organisation Message-ID: <568oYf9Q56zqEIRePcil5pYrIjEvvaPbqO6IKACeMtA=.c1f6d9f5-b566-46bb-8549-49458ed2e473@github.com> This change was proposed in the mailing list and the replies were positive to the organization. No changes have been made to the content of the sections. The new index looks like this: - Introduction - I have a patch, what do I do? 1. Sign the OCA 2. Socialize your change 3. Find a sponsor 4. Create a tracking issue in JBS 5. Get acquainted with local process - Why is my change rejected? - Mailing Lists - Changing your email address - Repositories - Terminology and Naming Scheme - Installing and Configuring Mercurial - Cloning - Code Conventions - JBS - JDK Bug System - Filing a Bug - How to fix an incorrect backport creation - Resolved - Incomplete - JBS Label Dictionary - Fixing a Bug - Testing the JDK - JTReg - Running OpenJDK JTReg Tests - GTest - Running OpenJDK GTests - Excluding a Test - ProblemListing jtreg tests - Exclude jtreg tests using @ignore - Dealing with JBS bugs for test exclusion - Producing a Changeset - Setting a JDK User Name - Creating - Merging - Pushing - Backing Out a Change - How to work with JBS when a change is backed out - How to work with mercurial when a change is backed out - Code Owners - Area mailing lists - Directory to area mapping - About this Guide - Glossary ------------- Commit messages: - Reworked guide organisation Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/39/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=guide&pr=39&range=00 Stats: 1499 lines in 1 file changed: 697 ins; 705 del; 97 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/39.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide pull/39/head:pull/39 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/39 From ihse at openjdk.java.net Wed Dec 9 13:11:40 2020 From: ihse at openjdk.java.net (Magnus Ihse Bursie) Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2020 13:11:40 GMT Subject: RFR: Reworked guide organisation In-Reply-To: <568oYf9Q56zqEIRePcil5pYrIjEvvaPbqO6IKACeMtA=.c1f6d9f5-b566-46bb-8549-49458ed2e473@github.com> References: <568oYf9Q56zqEIRePcil5pYrIjEvvaPbqO6IKACeMtA=.c1f6d9f5-b566-46bb-8549-49458ed2e473@github.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 22:46:48 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: > This change was proposed in the mailing list and the replies were positive to the organization. No changes have been made to the content of the sections. The new index looks like this: > > - Introduction > - I have a patch, what do I do? > 1. Sign the OCA > 2. Socialize your change > 3. Find a sponsor > 4. Create a tracking issue in JBS > 5. Get acquainted with local process > - Why is my change rejected? > - Mailing Lists > - Changing your email address > - Repositories > - Terminology and Naming Scheme > - Installing and Configuring Mercurial > - Cloning > - Code Conventions > - JBS - JDK Bug System > - Filing a Bug > - How to fix an incorrect backport creation > - Resolved - Incomplete > - JBS Label Dictionary > - Fixing a Bug > - Testing the JDK > - JTReg > - Running OpenJDK JTReg Tests > - GTest > - Running OpenJDK GTests > - Excluding a Test > - ProblemListing jtreg tests > - Exclude jtreg tests using @ignore > - Dealing with JBS bugs for test exclusion > - Producing a Changeset > - Setting a JDK User Name > - Creating > - Merging > - Pushing > - Backing Out a Change > - How to work with JBS when a change is backed out > - How to work with mercurial when a change is backed out > - Code Owners > - Area mailing lists > - Directory to area mapping > - About this Guide > - Glossary Marked as reviewed by ihse (no project role). I did not bother to check the entire patch to see that it matches what you claim in the PR description, but that description (and my random checks) look good! ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/39 From jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 10 23:00:16 2020 From: jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 23:00:16 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section on maintainer-pain [v4] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Added section on maintainer-pain Jesper Wilhelmsson has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Moved description to JBS Label Dictionary ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/37/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/37/files/15c22582..74f197ca Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=guide&pr=37&range=03 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=guide&pr=37&range=02-03 Stats: 43 lines in 1 file changed: 14 ins; 28 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/37.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide pull/37/head:pull/37 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/37 From jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 10 23:04:15 2020 From: jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 23:04:15 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section on maintainer-pain [v5] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Added section on maintainer-pain Jesper Wilhelmsson has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Fixed typo ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/37/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/37/files/74f197ca..dc0909b4 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=guide&pr=37&range=04 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=guide&pr=37&range=03-04 Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/37.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide pull/37/head:pull/37 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/37 From jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 10 23:04:16 2020 From: jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 23:04:16 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section on maintainer-pain [v3] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 20:57:46 GMT, Phil Race wrote: >> Jesper Wilhelmsson has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: >> >> Explicit examples and new header > > src/index.md line 983: > >> 981: >> 982: * A bug that occurs frequently in testing, maybe on a specific platform, maybe specific to one vendor's test infrastructure, and requires that many maintainers investigate the failure in different test runs just to realize it's the same issue as have been seen and reported before, or worse, don't realize it's a known issue and file a duplicate bug in JBS. >> 983: > > "as has" been seen Fixed. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/37 From jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 10 23:08:02 2020 From: jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2020 23:08:02 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section on maintainer-pain [v3] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 26 Nov 2020 22:49:30 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: >> I really don't think this entire section should be there. maintainer-pain is something that was discussed, and it made no sense, so it was discussed again and still seemed marginal and maybe was interesting to hotspot but has no broad acceptance or adoption. > >> I really don't think this entire section should be there. maintainer-pain is something that was discussed, and it made no sense, so it was discussed again and still seemed marginal and maybe was interesting to hotspot but has no broad acceptance or adoption. > > Unless there is another mail thread about this that I've forgotten (or not seen) than the one I linked to above, I don't agree that the idea of having a label to indicate that an issue is urgent was deemed to make no sense. There was a misunderstanding in the early part of the thread due to initial bad naming of the label, but once people understood what the label was about I don't see anyone objecting to the use of such a label. There are several positive comments in that thread suggesting that such a label would make sense. > > The label is only informational, there is no process that mandate that the label is used, but if someone set that label on your issue, you know what it means. It's up to you to decide wether to care or not, but as the text here says: "If you chose not to work on the issue, you should at least be aware that you are choosing to waste others' time and people will be affected by this choice." > > As for adoption you are absolutely right. The label hasn't been used a lot and I guess that could either be a good sign - we don't have many such bugs - or a sign of no one knowing about the label. > > After some mulling I do think I'd vote to include this section. I'd be willing to re-think the name of the label, "urgent" was suggested in the thread and in hind-sight I think it's a better label in some sense (more clear). I moved the entire description to the JBS Label Dictionary instead. This makes it more clear that this is not really a process, but rather an explanation of how to interpret and use the label. I also removed some wording that made the text sound as a process. @prrace Does this change make you more comfortable with the text? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/37 From iris at openjdk.java.net Fri Dec 11 22:22:00 2020 From: iris at openjdk.java.net (Iris Clark) Date: Fri, 11 Dec 2020 22:22:00 GMT Subject: RFR: Reworked guide organisation In-Reply-To: <568oYf9Q56zqEIRePcil5pYrIjEvvaPbqO6IKACeMtA=.c1f6d9f5-b566-46bb-8549-49458ed2e473@github.com> References: <568oYf9Q56zqEIRePcil5pYrIjEvvaPbqO6IKACeMtA=.c1f6d9f5-b566-46bb-8549-49458ed2e473@github.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 22:46:48 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: > This change was proposed in the mailing list and the replies were positive to the organization. No changes have been made to the content of the sections. The new index looks like this: > > - Introduction > - I have a patch, what do I do? > 1. Sign the OCA > 2. Socialize your change > 3. Find a sponsor > 4. Create a tracking issue in JBS > 5. Get acquainted with local process > - Why is my change rejected? > - Mailing Lists > - Changing your email address > - Repositories > - Terminology and Naming Scheme > - Installing and Configuring Mercurial > - Cloning > - Code Conventions > - JBS - JDK Bug System > - Filing a Bug > - How to fix an incorrect backport creation > - Resolved - Incomplete > - JBS Label Dictionary > - Fixing a Bug > - Testing the JDK > - JTReg > - Running OpenJDK JTReg Tests > - GTest > - Running OpenJDK GTests > - Excluding a Test > - ProblemListing jtreg tests > - Exclude jtreg tests using @ignore > - Dealing with JBS bugs for test exclusion > - Producing a Changeset > - Setting a JDK User Name > - Creating > - Merging > - Pushing > - Backing Out a Change > - How to work with JBS when a change is backed out > - How to work with mercurial when a change is backed out > - Code Owners > - Area mailing lists > - Directory to area mapping > - About this Guide > - Glossary A simple text re-org following recommendations already discussed in the mailing list. ------------- Marked as reviewed by iris (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/39 From prr at openjdk.java.net Sat Dec 12 00:01:03 2020 From: prr at openjdk.java.net (Phil Race) Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2020 00:01:03 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section on maintainer-pain [v5] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0bbiFS9ZioaRqzQCsyM86nualDfHrblYAcpRpEIdepQ=.696c562f-7d17-4657-a408-a3e617f75671@github.com> On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 23:04:15 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: >> Added section on maintainer-pain > > Jesper Wilhelmsson has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > Fixed typo Marked as reviewed by prr (no project role). ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/37 From jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net Mon Dec 14 07:05:01 2020 From: jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 07:05:01 GMT Subject: Integrated: Reworked guide organisation In-Reply-To: <568oYf9Q56zqEIRePcil5pYrIjEvvaPbqO6IKACeMtA=.c1f6d9f5-b566-46bb-8549-49458ed2e473@github.com> References: <568oYf9Q56zqEIRePcil5pYrIjEvvaPbqO6IKACeMtA=.c1f6d9f5-b566-46bb-8549-49458ed2e473@github.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 22:46:48 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: > This change was proposed in the mailing list and the replies were positive to the organization. No changes have been made to the content of the sections. The new index looks like this: > > - Introduction > - I have a patch, what do I do? > 1. Sign the OCA > 2. Socialize your change > 3. Find a sponsor > 4. Create a tracking issue in JBS > 5. Get acquainted with local process > - Why is my change rejected? > - Mailing Lists > - Changing your email address > - Repositories > - Terminology and Naming Scheme > - Installing and Configuring Mercurial > - Cloning > - Code Conventions > - JBS - JDK Bug System > - Filing a Bug > - How to fix an incorrect backport creation > - Resolved - Incomplete > - JBS Label Dictionary > - Fixing a Bug > - Testing the JDK > - JTReg > - Running OpenJDK JTReg Tests > - GTest > - Running OpenJDK GTests > - Excluding a Test > - ProblemListing jtreg tests > - Exclude jtreg tests using @ignore > - Dealing with JBS bugs for test exclusion > - Producing a Changeset > - Setting a JDK User Name > - Creating > - Merging > - Pushing > - Backing Out a Change > - How to work with JBS when a change is backed out > - How to work with mercurial when a change is backed out > - Code Owners > - Area mailing lists > - Directory to area mapping > - About this Guide > - Glossary This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 0285c5c2 Author: Jesper Wilhelmsson URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/commit/0285c5c2 Stats: 1499 lines in 1 file changed: 697 ins; 705 del; 97 mod Reworked guide organisation Reviewed-by: ihse, iris ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/39 From iris at openjdk.java.net Mon Dec 14 21:13:04 2020 From: iris at openjdk.java.net (Iris Clark) Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2020 21:13:04 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section on maintainer-pain [v5] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <7geGcp6pXl6k3sxqstxfGHOUMLFO20kmSUPAeTFAlwE=.3d4f0de4-e392-48cc-b0de-7d6f1fc41507@github.com> On Thu, 10 Dec 2020 23:04:15 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: >> Added section on maintainer-pain > > Jesper Wilhelmsson has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > Fixed typo Marked as reviewed by iris (Reviewer). ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/37 From jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net Wed Dec 16 08:26:13 2020 From: jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 08:26:13 GMT Subject: RFR: Added section on maintainer-pain [v6] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6RPAN3RIKGjS3Y3un5ryT094jcu66XpcHn_b05hzlbE=.7d90e822-49e1-4fbd-86c1-cd784a03802f@github.com> > Added section on maintainer-pain Jesper Wilhelmsson has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains six commits: - Merge - Fixed typo - Moved description to JBS Label Dictionary - Explicit examples and new header - Refer to ProblemList section - Added section on maintainer-pain ------------- Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/37/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=guide&pr=37&range=05 Stats: 15 lines in 1 file changed: 14 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/37.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide pull/37/head:pull/37 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/37 From jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net Wed Dec 16 08:26:14 2020 From: jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 08:26:14 GMT Subject: Integrated: Added section on maintainer-pain In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 18:26:32 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: > Added section on maintainer-pain This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 32618120 Author: Jesper Wilhelmsson URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/commit/32618120 Stats: 15 lines in 1 file changed: 14 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Added section on maintainer-pain Reviewed-by: iignatyev, lancea, prr, iris ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/37 From jesper.wilhelmsson at oracle.com Wed Dec 16 21:41:16 2020 From: jesper.wilhelmsson at oracle.com (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Wed, 16 Dec 2020 22:41:16 +0100 Subject: Unify the language in the Guide Message-ID: <48E06A49-A5A4-4B11-903C-6923358E52A3@oracle.com> Hi, I'd like to unify the language in the Guide with regards to contractions. However I can't decide if we should go all in on using contractions or avoid them all together - or if there are cases for both. is not -- isn't do not -- don't are not -- aren't etc I haven't found a good English language guide to explain wether it's more correct to use contractions or not to use them in a text like the Guide. Any ideas here? Personally I prefer using contractions, but I'm not a native English speaker so what do I know :-) There may also be a difference between British English and American English (there usually is), if so we should strive to use American English in the Guide. Any opinions in either direction is much appreciated. Thanks, /Jesper From jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 17 00:41:10 2020 From: jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 00:41:10 GMT Subject: RFR: Fix merge bug Message-ID: A merge in the latest change undid an older fix in the maintainer-pain anchor. ------------- Commit messages: - Fixed merge bug Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/40/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=guide&pr=40&range=00 Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/40.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide pull/40/head:pull/40 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/40 From iris at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 17 00:45:59 2020 From: iris at openjdk.java.net (Iris Clark) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 00:45:59 GMT Subject: RFR: Fix merge bug In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 00:37:15 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: > A merge in the latest change undid an older fix in the maintainer-pain anchor. Marked as reviewed by iris (Reviewer). ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/40 From jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 17 00:46:00 2020 From: jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 00:46:00 GMT Subject: Integrated: Fix merge bug In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 00:37:15 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: > A merge in the latest change undid an older fix in the maintainer-pain anchor. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 6e5197d9 Author: Jesper Wilhelmsson URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/commit/6e5197d9 Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Fix merge bug Reviewed-by: iris ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/40 From jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 17 02:20:08 2020 From: jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 02:20:08 GMT Subject: Integrated: Fixed tidy errors Message-ID: Fixed some errors found by tidy, and added a make target to run tidy on the generated index.html ------------- Commit messages: - Fixed tidy errors Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/41/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=guide&pr=41&range=00 Stats: 25 lines in 2 files changed: 5 ins; 0 del; 20 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/41.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide pull/41/head:pull/41 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/41 From iris at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 17 02:20:08 2020 From: iris at openjdk.java.net (Iris Clark) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 02:20:08 GMT Subject: Integrated: Fixed tidy errors In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 02:12:56 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: > Fixed some errors found by tidy, and added a make target to run tidy on the generated index.html Straight-forward changes. ------------- Marked as reviewed by iris (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/41 From jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net Thu Dec 17 02:20:09 2020 From: jwilhelm at openjdk.java.net (Jesper Wilhelmsson) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 02:20:09 GMT Subject: Integrated: Fixed tidy errors In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 17 Dec 2020 02:12:56 GMT, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: > Fixed some errors found by tidy, and added a make target to run tidy on the generated index.html This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: d8194c3a Author: Jesper Wilhelmsson URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/commit/d8194c3a Stats: 25 lines in 2 files changed: 5 ins; 0 del; 20 mod Fixed tidy errors Reviewed-by: iris ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/guide/pull/41 From david.holmes at oracle.com Thu Dec 17 11:22:44 2020 From: david.holmes at oracle.com (David Holmes) Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 21:22:44 +1000 Subject: Unify the language in the Guide In-Reply-To: <48E06A49-A5A4-4B11-903C-6923358E52A3@oracle.com> References: <48E06A49-A5A4-4B11-903C-6923358E52A3@oracle.com> Message-ID: Hi Jesper, On 17/12/2020 7:41 am, Jesper Wilhelmsson wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to unify the language in the Guide with regards to contractions. However I can't decide if we should go all in on using contractions or avoid them all together - or if there are cases for both. > > is not -- isn't > do not -- don't > are not -- aren't > etc > > I haven't found a good English language guide to explain wether it's more correct to use contractions or not to use them in a text like the Guide. Any ideas here? More an issue of style: formal versus informal IMO. I consulted a few technical books, published in the US, which I would consider "guides" and they seem to use contractions. For example the Pro-Git book uses them. But in contrast JLS (a more formal specification) seems not to (though one "doesn't" seems to have snuck in). I'd consider the guide more informal so contractions are fine IMO. Cheers, David ----- > Personally I prefer using contractions, but I'm not a native English speaker so what do I know :-) > > There may also be a difference between British English and American English (there usually is), if so we should strive to use American English in the Guide. > > Any opinions in either direction is much appreciated. > > Thanks, > /Jesper >