[8u] RFR 8160768: Add capability to custom resolve host/domain names within the default JNDI LDAP provider
Langer, Christoph
christoph.langer at sap.com
Tue Aug 11 05:55:42 UTC 2020
Hi Joe,
thanks for the clarification.
So for this change I'll file a separate CSR for 11u, due to the implementation differences. But generally sharing CSRs between 8u and 11u would be possible. Good to know.
Cheers
Christoph
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Joe Darcy <joe.darcy at oracle.com>
> Sent: Montag, 10. August 2020 23:22
> To: Langer, Christoph <christoph.langer at sap.com>; Hohensee, Paul
> <hohensee at amazon.com>; Zhengyu Gu <zgu at redhat.com>; Severin
> Gehwolf <sgehwolf at redhat.com>; jdk8u-dev <jdk8u-
> dev at openjdk.java.net>; Andrew Hughes <gnu.andrew at redhat.com>; jdk-
> updates-dev at openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: [8u] RFR 8160768: Add capability to custom resolve host/domain
> names within the default JNDI LDAP provider
>
> Hello,
>
> The practices of CSR and multiple releases have evolved slightly as the
> system has been in use for a few years now.
>
> The CSR FAQ https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/csr/CSR+FAQs covers
> some of the conditions as quoted below [1].
>
> In cases where
>
> 1) the exact same change is being made in multiple release trains
>
> and
>
> 2) the decision to but the change in multiple releases is being
> made at the same time
>
> then a single CSR can be shared by putting multiple releases (or release
> families) in the fixVesion field.
>
> In this case, it sounds like there are some minor differences so two CSR
> should be filed.
>
> Criteria 2) means that if, say, there is a CSR to put a change in 11u
> and that change is pushed and three months later there is a desire to
> put the change into 8u, a separate CSR would be needed. I treat the CSRs
> as updatable until the underlying bug is pushed to a repo. After that
> point, it should generally not be further modified or reused.
>
> HTH,
>
> -Joe
>
> [1] Q: How should I get CSR review for multiple release trains?
> A: Say you want to get an interface change into JDK N and later decide
> the change is also desirable and appropriate for the JDK (N-1) update
> release and that update release is using the CSR process. First a CSR
> should be created from the main bug targeted at JDK N. Afterward, if a
> backport of the main bug covering JDK (N-1) does not already exist, a
> backport of the main bug covering JDK (N-1) should be created. Then, a
> CSR can be created from that backport. The CSR for the backport should
> explicitly state how the interface change for the backport relates to
> the interface change for the main release: either the interface change
> is the same or, if it differs, what the difference is.
>
> On 8/10/2020 12:00 PM, Langer, Christoph wrote:
> > Hi Paul,
> >
> > well, I've seen Oracle doing such Multi-Release CSRs. E.g.
> https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8235540. Copying Joe for
> clarification. @Joe: Was this an accident or a correct way to use the CSR
> process? Generally I would welcome this as I believe it could reduce some
> process overhead...
> >
> > Nevertheless, in this case, while the backport service implementation
> classes are the same, there are minor differences in the implementation
> (e.g. addition of module jdk.naming.ldap in 11u and different package for
> LdapDnsProviderService) that would speak for two separate CSRs. I don't
> know...
> >
> > Cheers
> > Christoph
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Hohensee, Paul <hohensee at amazon.com>
> >> Sent: Montag, 10. August 2020 16:45
> >> To: Langer, Christoph <christoph.langer at sap.com>; Zhengyu Gu
> >> <zgu at redhat.com>; Severin Gehwolf <sgehwolf at redhat.com>; jdk8u-
> dev
> >> <jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net>; Andrew Hughes
> >> <gnu.andrew at redhat.com>; jdk-updates-dev at openjdk.java.net
> >> Subject: RE: [8u] RFR 8160768: Add capability to custom resolve
> host/domain
> >> names within the default JNDI LDAP provider
> >>
> >> I don't think you can have the same CSR for both releases because it
> messes
> >> up the accounting. I.e., there's a backport issues for 8u and another one
> for
> >> 11u, and each of these needs its own CSR. The two CSRs will have identical
> >> content in this case. :)
> >>
> >> Paul
> >>
> >> On 8/10/20, 5:25 AM, "Langer, Christoph" <christoph.langer at sap.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> as I'm in parallel working on an 11u backport and have the same
> >> requirement for a CSR, I added release 11-pool to the CSR item (JDK-
> >> 8251270). I think we can have one CSR for both releases. The user-visible
> >> change that we want to do, that is, the introduction of
> com.sun.jndi.ldap.spi.
> >> LdapDnsProvider and com.sun.jndi.ldap.spi. LdapDnsProviderResult is the
> >> same, so I guess it is most convenient.
> >>
> >> Hope you're all ok with that? (I'll take no answer as a yes ��)
> >>
> >> I'll also go ahead and rephrase the CSR to use com.sun.jndi.ldap.spi
> instead
> >> of javax.naming.ldap.spi.
> >>
> >> Best regards
> >> Christoph
> >>
> >> > -----Original Message-----
> >> > From: jdk8u-dev <jdk8u-dev-retn at openjdk.java.net> On Behalf Of
> >> > Hohensee, Paul
> >> > Sent: Freitag, 7. August 2020 18:15
> >> > To: Zhengyu Gu <zgu at redhat.com>; Severin Gehwolf
> >> > <sgehwolf at redhat.com>; jdk8u-dev <jdk8u-
> dev at openjdk.java.net>;
> >> > Andrew Hughes <gnu.andrew at redhat.com>
> >> > Subject: RE: [8u] RFR 8160768: Add capability to custom resolve
> >> host/domain
> >> > names within the default JNDI LDAP provider
> >> >
> >> > We do, because any behavioral/API change needs one, even to
> platform
> >> > dependent classes.
> >> >
> >> > On 8/7/20, 7:44 AM, "Zhengyu Gu" <zgu at redhat.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On 8/7/20 9:55 AM, Hohensee, Paul wrote:
> >> > > You can backport this to 8u. As Michael Osipov wrote (and Alan as
> a
> >> > comment on the 8u CSR), you just need to change the 8u CSR and
> patch
> >> to
> >> > move the new functionality to com.sun.jndi.ldap and
> >> com.sun.jndi.ldap.spi.
> >> >
> >> > Right. But we don't need CSR for that, correct?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> >
> >> > -Zhengyu
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks,
> >> > > Paul
> >> > >
> >> > > On 8/7/20, 5:48 AM, "Zhengyu Gu" <zgu at redhat.com> wrote:
> >> > >
> >> > > CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the
> organization.
> >> Do
> >> > not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender
> >> and
> >> > know the content is safe.
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > Hi Paul,
> >> > >
> >> > > Based on Alan Bateman's comment, we can not backport public
> API
> >> to
> >> > 8u. I
> >> > > guess LdapDnsProvider.java and LdapDnsProviderResult.java
> have
> >> to
> >> > be
> >> > > moved to com.sun.jndi.ldap and com.sun.jndi.ldap.spi
> packages.
> >> > >
> >> > > I will withdraw this CSR, ok?
> >> > >
> >> > > Thanks,
> >> > >
> >> > > -Zhengyu
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > > On 8/6/20 5:32 PM, Hohensee, Paul wrote:
> >> > > > I filed a backport issue
> >> > > >
> >> > > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8251270
> >> > > >
> >> > > > and corresponding CSR
> >> > > >
> >> > > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8251270
> >> > > >
> >> > > > and assigned them to Zhengyu.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On 8/6/20, 1:50 PM, "jdk8u-dev on behalf of Hohensee, Paul"
> >> > <jdk8u-dev-retn at openjdk.java.net on behalf of
> >> hohensee at amazon.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > +1 on needing a CSR for the backport. I'd missed the CSR
> link
> >> > because it was buried under "Show 5 more links".
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I posted an RFO (Request for Opinion) on the same topic of
> >> > approving strictly additive CSRs for backport.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk8u-dev/2020-
> >> > August/012319.html
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Thanks,
> >> > > > Paul
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On 8/6/20, 8:02 AM, "jdk8u-dev on behalf of Severin
> Gehwolf"
> >> > <jdk8u-dev-retn at openjdk.java.net on behalf of
> sgehwolf at redhat.com>
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > On Thu, 2020-08-06 at 10:13 -0400, Zhengyu Gu wrote:
> >> > > > > > The original patch required a CSR[1], so we should file
> >> one
> >> > for JDK 8u
> >> > > > > > too. I wonder where the CSR is for Oracle JDK 8,
> though.
> >> > > > >
> >> > > > > It does not seem to have a CSR for 11u backport(?) Do
> 8u
> >> need
> >> > one?
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Right. I don't know about what happened there for
> Oracle
> >> JDK.
> >> > You could
> >> > > > try to ask.
> >> > > >
> >> > > > I believe we need one since this is changing the 8 SE API
> by
> >> > adding:
> >> > > >
> >> > > > javax/naming/ldap/spi/LdapDnsProvider.java
> >> > > > javax/naming/ldap/spi/LdapDnsProviderResult.java
> >> > > >
> >> > > > Thanks,
> >> > > > Severin
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> >
> >>
More information about the jdk-updates-dev
mailing list