OpenJDK 8u212 status

[jesper.wilhelmsson at oracle.com]

> On 14 Mar 2019, at 03:46, Andrew John Hughes <gnu.andrew at redhat.com> wrote:
> 
> On 13/03/2019 20:40, jesper.wilhelmsson at oracle.com wrote:
>>> On 13 Mar 2019, at 10:24, Severin Gehwolf <sgehwolf at redhat.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> On Wed, 2019-03-13 at 09:08 +0000, Langer, Christoph wrote:
>>>>> Paul & Aleksey are both 8u reviewers. Are we in a position to propose
>>>>> any more?
>>>> 
>>>> I think Severin could be proposed as reviewer. He has enough pushes in jdk8u.
>>> 
>>> I'm flattered, thanks. It would be a bit awkward, though, since I'm not
>>> a reviewer in jdk/jdk.
>> 
>> Being a Reviewer in the jdk project is not a requirement to become a Reviewer in the jdk8u project. These are two separate projects. There are plenty of examples of developers who are Reviewers in jdk8u but not in jdk.
>> 
>> /Jesper
>> 
>>> 
>>> Thanks,
>>> Severin
>>> 
>> 
> 
> I do think those of us outside Oracle are probably too stringent on
> ourselves on this, and I don't see the same reluctance in proposing
> votes among Oracle staff.
> 
> There are many who are reviewers for 9 and later without being reviewers
> for earlier releases, simply because of the way reviewership is carried
> forward to new JDK projects, but not applied retrospectively. If you
> started working on OpenJDK at the time of OpenJDK 9 or 10, you likely
> have committer or reviewer status there, but nothing further back. This
> problem only gets deeper the further back you go and we struggle even
> more for reviewers on OpenJDK 7.
> 
> At the end of the day, the only requirement in the bylaws [0] is that of
> a vote, the legitimacy of which is conferred by the proposer being
> someone who already holds the required status. Any further guidelines on
> what makes someone eligible for that status are just that; guidelines.
> My own interpretation of the bylaws is that the burden of proof for
> rejecting such a nomination lies on the person who attempts to veto it
> [1] and that the eligibility of the nominee is left down to the
> discretion of the nominator.

Yes, I think this is exactly how to interpret the bylaws.

> With that in mind, I'm happy to suggest Christoph for jdk8u reviewership
> (as he already has it for 9+) and Severin for jdk reviewership (we can
> look into 8u after)

I was about to follow up my email with a nomination of Severin for 8u Reviewer but I realized that I'm not a Reviewer in 8u myself so that didn't work... :-)
/Jesper

> 
> [0] https://openjdk.java.net/bylaws#reviewer
> [1] https://openjdk.java.net/bylaws#veto
> --
> Andrew :)
> 
> Senior Free Java Software Engineer
> Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)
> 
> PGP Key: ed25519/0xCFDA0F9B35964222 (hkp://keys.gnupg.net)
> Fingerprint = 5132 579D D154 0ED2 3E04  C5A0 CFDA 0F9B 3596 4222
> https://keybase.io/gnu_andrew
>