Backport request for JDK-8034773

[Langer, Christoph]

Hi Jaikiran,

https://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/ is the correct one. (Though the same patch would probably apply to jdk8u...)

/Christoph

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Jaikiran Pai <jai.forums2013 at gmail.com>
> Sent: Montag, 28. Oktober 2019 11:58
> To: Langer, Christoph <christoph.langer at sap.com>; jdk8u-
> dev at openjdk.java.net
> Subject: Re: Backport request for JDK-8034773
> 
> Thank you for those details, Christoph.
> 
> I'll start preparing the patch. Which of the following 2 repos is the
> correct one to patch and propose a RFR against:
> 
> https://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u/
> 
> https://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8u/jdk8u-dev/
> 
> -Jaikiran
> 
> On 28/10/19 4:16 PM, Langer, Christoph wrote:
> > Hi Jaikiran,
> >
> > this fix is definitely a good candidate for a backport to jdk8u.
> >
> > What you should do now is to extract the patch and apply it to 8u. It'll
> probably need some reshuffling and further adaptations. Once you have it,
> please post an RFR webrev on this mailing list and add the jdk8u-fix-request
> label to the bug with a comment, referring to the mailing list's review thread.
> >
> > Cheers
> > Christoph
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: jdk8u-dev <jdk8u-dev-bounces at openjdk.java.net> On Behalf Of
> >> Jaikiran Pai
> >> Sent: Montag, 28. Oktober 2019 07:09
> >> To: jdk8u-dev at openjdk.java.net
> >> Subject: Backport request for JDK-8034773
> >>
> >> One of the projects I watch, has run into an issue[1] which has been
> >> fixed in Java 9+. The fix for Java 9+ went in as part of this issue[2].
> >> The related commit for it is [3] and includes more than one bug fix. The
> >> commit itself is relatively small and has a testcase included.
> >>
> >> I am new to the backport request process. What would be the best way
> >> forward to have this change backported to OpenJDK 8? Should I be raising
> >> a backport request in the JBS (I've "author" role, so can do that if
> >> that's necessary)?
> >>
> >> Right now, the issue has been worked around[4] in the project where we
> >> hit it. But I would like to avoid more such changes all over the place,
> >> by having this fixed in OpenJDK itself.
> >>
> >> [1] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8233015
> >>
> >> [2] https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8034773
> >>
> >> [3] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk9/jdk9/jdk/rev/6f00367ab8e1
> >>
> >> [4] https://github.com/quarkusio/quarkus/pull/4865
> >>
> >> -Jaikiran
> >>
> >>