[jdk11u-dev] RFR: 8248238: Implementation: JEP 388: Windows AArch64 Support [v13]

[Andrew Haley]

On Fri, 26 Nov 2021 21:56:01 GMT, Christoph Langer <clanger at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Could you /reviewer credit me too? Thanks
>
>> OK, I hope @VladimirKempik and @magicus will be credited correctly, but they should. The preliminary commit message in the commit above is hopefully misleading.
> 
> Hm, my hope was wrong, I'm sorry, @VladimirKempik. I now think you would have had to approve the PR in GitHub once again...

> I agree with @RealCLanger. The original work was done by 3 contributors, so I think it is appreciable (and should be encouraged) if any of the original contributors spent their time reviewing the backport, and hence they should be listed as reviewers (despite their project status).

Sure, it's a joint contribution, and all authors should be credited.

> Similarly, @VladimirKempik and @magicus spent their time and effort helping out with the original work and the backport as well. For some reason, I don't see them both in the reviewer for the backport and I don't see any of their code comments when I click on their `review comments` icon in the top right area. So maybe @VladimirKempik and @magicus would need to manually mark this backport as reviewed to get the credit. Thanks for having this discussion.

Fair enough, but that's about acquiring brownie points, whereas I'm talking about processes. 

The purpose of a review tick is to mark a change as reviewed, and we need Reviewers to do that. However, the list of "Reviewers" at the top right of this page doesn't indicate which ones are Reviewers. Thankfully, Skara does provide the information we need (in the Reviewers section at the top of the discussion) so we have what we need.

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk11u-dev/pull/301