[jdk17u-dev] RFR: 8364597: Replace THL A29 Limited with Tencent

[Goetz Lindenmaier]

On Thu, 4 Sep 2025 15:03:20 GMT, John Jiang <jjiang at openjdk.org> wrote:

>>> @gnu-andrew Thanks for your review and approval!
>>> 
>>> > Note that `test/hotspot/jtreg/gtest/MetaspaceUtilsGtests.java` was also in the 21u patch, so is not new to 17u.
>>> 
>>> When I backported a commit from a repo (baseline), like `openjdk/jdk`, to another repo (target), say `openjdk/jdk17u`, I just focused on the baseline and target. So, I didn't mention other repos, including 21u.
>> 
>> For a backport to 17u, the baseline should be 21u. The general expected process for backports is that the oldest supported release is addressed first (hence [Goetz's request for 25](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk21u-dev/pull/2138#issuecomment-3245978677)) and then each successive long-term support release as applicable. It doesn't really save any time to try and do them all in parallel, as we would not approve a backport for an older release before it enters a more recent release, except in exceptional circumstances. It can also result in additional work if changes need to be made as part of the review of the backport for the most recent release.
>> 
>> As mentioned in my review, this one is a little different, as it is a backport in spirit and the changes are going to differ between releases based on which copyright headers are present in each release. But please bear this in mind for any future backports.
>
>> As mentioned in my review, this one is a little different, as it is a backport in spirit and the changes are going to differ between releases based on which copyright headers are present in each release.
> 
> Yes, it looks not a regular backport.
> I just wanted to update all the Tencent copyright headers.
> 
>> But please bear this in mind for any future backports.
> 
> I see. Thanks again!

Hi @johnshajiang 
please enable the GHA tests on this repo and retrigger running the tests.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk17u-dev/pull/3882#issuecomment-3265467652