Test Backports

[Andrew John Hughes]

On 16 April 2010 17:35, Joe Darcy <joe.darcy at oracle.com> wrote:
> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>
>> On 16 April 2010 02:09, Joe Darcy <joe.darcy at oracle.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 15 April 2010 02:03, Joe Darcy <joe.darcy at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 04/11/10 01:42 PM, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10 April 2010 03:40, Kelly O'Hair <kelly.ohair at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 9, 2010, at 7:20 PM, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 10 April 2010 01:48, Kelly O'Hair <kelly.ohair at oracle.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 9, 2010, at 5:05 PM, Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Just waiting on Kelly's reponse now wrt. the HotSpot source/target fix.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you clarify what response you are waiting on?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, sorry it's this one:
>>>>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk6-dev/2010-April/001464.html
>>>>>
>>>>> It wasn't clear whether you were ok with the HotSpot change or wanted
>>>>> more time to review.  The patch is pretty much as-is in OpenJDK7, the
>>>>> only difference being the version change from 6 to 5.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The hotspot file changes look ok, but I have no idea how the hotspot
>>>>> changes are being handled for openjdk6.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> We regularly import from the stablisation branches:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/hsx/hsx14/master/ (OpenJDK6 b17 & b18)
>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/hsx/hsx16/master/ (OpenJDK6 b19)
>>>>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/hsx/hsx17/master/ (OpenJDK6 b20?)
>>>>>
>>>>> The last one, hs17, includes the OpenJDK7 version of this fix.
>>>>> Including an OpenJDK6 version now with 1.5 source and target versions
>>>>> has the advantage that we won't bring in a version that requires
>>>>> source and target versions of 1.6 from hs17.
>>>>>
>>>>> Joe, does b20 sound appropriate for hs17?  I know it's a bit soon
>>>>> after hs16, but the proprietary JDK6 is already moving towards this
>>>>> and we could do with catching up.  It will be take time for such an
>>>>> OpenJDK6 release to roll through into an IcedTea6 release and then the
>>>>> distros anyway, so I'd prefer sooner rather than later.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I'm not sure of the timeline for hs17.
>>>>>
>>>>> At some point, the copyright notices in the OpenJDK 6 repo will be
>>>>> changed
>>>>> from Sun -> Oracle.  A more general announcement about this process and
>>>>> the
>>>>> new conventions will be forthcoming.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This has already happened in hs17.  I queried the rather strange
>>>> ranges used on the new notices earlier this week.
>>>>
>>>> Making these copyright changes, at
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> least in the langtools and jdk repos, might warrant a separate build
>>>>> with
>>>>> just those changes, in which case the upgrade of the HotSpot sources to
>>>>> HS
>>>>> 17 (with changed copyrights?) might occur in build 21 or later.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Do we really need a new build just for that?  I doubt we'd bother
>>>> upgrading IcedTea6 to such a build just for that change.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> I don't think a new build number is strictly required for the copyright
>>> change, but I think it makes the change easier to administer: "before
>>> build
>>> N, Sun copyrights; build N and later, Oracle copyrights."
>>>
>>> I agree there would be little motivation for IcedTea 6 to pick up that
>>> build
>>> just to get new copyright notices.
>>>
>>> -Joe
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Ok, do you have any idea when these changes will happen?  My worry is
>> that this effectively means a block on OpenJDK6 activity until then.
>>
>
> I think this could be taken care of in the next two weeks.
>
>> Assuming we want b20 to be the N mentioned above, we could upgrade
>> HotSpot to 17 as part of b20, bringing with it both the new copyrights
>> and keeping us in sync with the proprietary JDK6 (hs17b13, the current
>> build, will be used in 6u21 b03 -
>>
>> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/hotspot-dev/2010-April/002843.html).
>>  Then it really would be the case that all copyrights change in that
>> build and we also have a single new feature (hs17) too.  The only
>> changes to langtools & jdk would be the copyrights.
>>
>> Does this sound sensible?
>
> Yes.
>

Ok, I'll post a webrev when I'm back next week.

>>  The alternative for HotSpot would be to
>> change the copyrights on the current OpenJDK6 version, which would
>> duplicate the work already done on hs17 and may make merging hs17
>> harder.
>>
>
> I agree that path would be undesirable.
>
>> Will the copyrights in CORBA, JAXP and JAXWS be changing?
>>
>>
>
> Yes.  For jaxp and jaxws, new source files will need to be generated.
>
> -Joe
>



-- 
Andrew :-)

Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)

Support Free Java!
Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK
http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath
http://openjdk.java.net

PGP Key: 94EFD9D8 (http://subkeys.pgp.net)
Fingerprint: F8EF F1EA 401E 2E60 15FA  7927 142C 2591 94EF D9D8