redhat-openjdk labels in JIRA

[Gil Tene]

Thanks for the clarification Aleksey, on who “we” is, and about 
this redhat-openjdk tag indicating RedHat interest in the issue,
and not some project-wide identification of interest. Also
regarding the meaning, in that the tag itself does not mean
“RedHat doing backport”, so non-RedHat folks wanting to indicate
that they are working on a backport can/should feel free to do that
regardless of this tag.

We (Azul) will start using an azul-openjdk tag in a similar way,
to indicate our identified interest in an issue, but not actual 
“doing backport”. Using comments to indicate actual
“doing backport” action makes sense.

Sent from my iPad

> On Apr 25, 2019, at 4:52 AM, Aleksey Shipilev <shade at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
>> On 4/25/19 1:31 PM, Gil Tene wrote:
>> Why use “redhat” in a tag name used for overall coordination outside of RedHat personnel? Can we
>> come up with a non-vendor-specific tag that would mean “issue of interest to the project”, or
>> “issues of interest for backporting”?
> 
> If you read my note carefully, it says: "We ***used to have it*** to coordinate work with others".
> This is not a case anymore, and this is just the Red Hat -specific tag on issues for our internal
> use. With this note, I just notify others that this tag does not mean anything special for others
> anymore: feel free to take on the backport, regardless of the tag. Earlier discussions suggested we
> coordinate (avoid duplicate) work by putting the "doing backport" comments when starting the actual
> work.
> 
>> E.g. backport-openjdk seems much more appropriate than redhat-openjdk. Or backport-8u and
>> backport-11u (and backport-7u) if we want to specifically identify them per target updates
>> project or version.
> 
> Well, there is no central party that lists all the backports that are needed to be done. I don't
> think we have to have such a party, and actually having the update release participants tracking on
> their own brings redundancy to the project (keeps issues from accidentally slipping from everyone's
> tracking at once!).
> 
> Everyone chooses the interesting issues for themselves, sometimes sharing the list, sometimes
> keeping it internally. Christoph has the list of candidates from Oracle [1], and I'm sure SAP has
> the internal "interest" list of backports too. Oracle also has "8-bp" and "11-bp" tags that are used
> for that? We have "redhat-openjdk" tag for that, etc. If you are looking for backporting work, you
> can look through whatever vendor-interest lists there are.
> 
> The bottom-line is that anyone else can do whatever fits them tracking-wise, and that Feels Right
> (tm). Also, nobody is required to explain what private tags they use and why; it is just a courtesy
> to tell others what we are up to, and how could others interpret those tags.
> 
> -Aleksey
> 
> [1] https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk-updates-dev/2019-February/000654.html
>