JDK 7 Updates: Policy Changes

[Andrew Haley]

On 10/07/15 19:04, dalibor topic wrote:
> On 29.06.2015 12:44, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> Which bug database should we use?  The OpenJDK JIRA is the obvious
>> choice, but access is very limited.  For OpenJDK 6 updates we have
>> been using the database at https://java.net/jira/browse/OPENJDK6,
>> which is much more accessible.  Should we do the same for OpenJDK 7?
> 
> If you foresee yourself continuing to work on JDK 7 updates for a while, 
> and then also want to consider working on JDK 8 Updates at some point in 
> the future, having to maintain a monotonically increasing amount of 
> information about issues in multiple distinct places sounds like a 
> rather problematic idea to me, fraught with all kinds of transaction costs.

Indeed it does.  I'm not at all happy about it, but there seem to be
no really nice solutions.

> I assume based on other comments in the thread that part of the 
> insecurity about using JBS is due to the JDK Project in JBS being 
> simultaneously used by multiple different Projects. While there is a 
> transaction cost argument to be made about the benefits of such sharing, 
> I understand the inherent desire to stake out a claim on a space of 
> one's own that doesn't need to be shared to reduce risk & friction and 
> increase familiarity with a new tool & process.
> 
> OpenJDK Projects can have a corresponding Project in JBS, if the Project 
> Lead so chooses and requests from the ops team. In such a case, requests 
> to change the configuration would probably go from the Project Lead to 
> the ops team.

OK, so let me be sure I understand what you mean.  We could create a
new Project in JBS called (say) OpenJDK7u.  It would therefore be
separate from proprietary 7u.  That sounds quite attractive.  We'd
still have the problem that only Authors could create and comment on
bugs, but I think that's liveable.

> like for a few weeks down the road, it should not pose a massive
> challenge to ask the ops team in time to add them to a Project's JBS
> configuration, for example.
> 
> As far as names go, I'd suggest using JDK7U or something like that,
> as the OpenJDK 7 Project completed its work back in 2011. Calling
> something new "OpenJDK 7" in 2015 would be rather irritating.

:-)

Andrew.