This (and other) bug updates are incorrect.

Aleksey Shipilev shade at redhat.com
Thu Apr 25 21:03:30 UTC 2019


On 4/25/19 10:57 PM, Daniel D. Daugherty wrote:
> On 4/25/19 3:44 PM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> If there are none, people would
>> invent/reuse the closest one, like the blank major revision. This will happen soon with somebody
>> else, because the confusion is real; any many do this around JBS as well. More examples below.
> 
> I guess I'm not understanding why someone would file an issue
> without specifying the exact version number they are seeing
> the issue reproduce with.

Because sometimes it is rather unclear what the "exact version where issue reproduces" is. If this
looks very clear to you, would you mind guiding me through properly versioning the issues below?

>> But, I have trouble fixing these oddly versioned ones:
>>
>> == "Update GIFlib library to the 5.1.8":
>>    https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8220495
>>
>> Which "Affects Version" should it take? If we look back to issue history, there is a previous update
>> happened here:
>>    https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8155691
>>
>> Should it be 8u161 then?
>>
>> == "Xalan Update: Xalan Java 2.7.2":
>>    https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8193830
>>
>> The issue already has 8u backports, but affects-version did not have any "8*" version. Which version
>> to put there? The bug does not even link any related issues to see when was the latest update. I put
>> "8" there this morning, which version should I put instead? I think this is one of those cases where
>> "8" fits: it is not a bug, and 8 GA does not have new Xalan.
>>
>> == "Upgrade IANA LSR data"
>>    https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8213294
>>
>> So it has backport to 8u221, which version to use then? 8u201? Or, using the logic from Xalan issue
>> above, it is also proper "8"?
>>
>> == "[Windows] Exception if no printers are installed."
>>    https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8212202
>>
>> It had backports to 8u212 and 8u231. It seems to be caused by JDK-8153732, which was backported to
>> 8u212 and 8u231, which versions to use then? 8u212?

Thanks,
-Aleksey



More information about the jdk8u-dev mailing list