[jdk8u-dev] RFR: 8335552: [8u] JDK-8303466 backport to 8u requires 3 ::Identity signature fixes

[Francisco Ferrari Bihurriet]

On Wed, 3 Jul 2024 15:36:51 GMT, Andrew John Hughes <andrew at openjdk.org> wrote:

>>> I just noticed that, given [cbd483a](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk8u-dev/commit/cbd483afa413f006c991f1b4d92c83463cc11baa), this is a clean backport of JDK 9's [JDK-8075511](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8075511) ([openjdk/jdk9u at 8efb3ab](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk9u/commit/8efb3ab7c1cf0164237c50d60c4cd564b3d6a897)). For the sake of clarity, I will add the issue and apply for approval there too. Sorry @jerboaa for bothering you with one more approval.
>> 
>> @franferrax Hmm, thinking some more about this and seeing the warnings on the added issue. Please create a separate backport for it and then merge that into this one.
>
>> @jerboaa:
>> 
>> > @franferrax Hmm, thinking some more about this and seeing the warnings on the added issue. Please create a separate backport for it and then merge that into this one.
>> 
>> How about it now? The PR is recognized as a backport, links both issues and has the title of the most relevant one.
>> 
>> @gnu-andrew:
>> 
>> > Yes, please separate the enhancement into a separate PR. Adding a new warning has a different potential impact to just fixing the bug introduced by JDK-8335472
>> 
>> @jerboaa was referring to the Skara tooling warning saying that the PR wasn't being recognized as a backport. With respecto to the GCC warning, it would have prevented [JDK-8335472](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8335472). The addition of the warning has been there since the beginning of the PR, which has been reviewed and approved with that change.
>> 
>> What happened, is that later I realized that the change is in fact a clean backport of [JDK-8075511](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8075511) and wanted to document that.
>> 
>> @jerboaa, @gnu-andrew: are you OK to continue in this way?
> 
> No. Please make [JDK-8075511](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8075511) a separate PR and commit. I agree it is good to catch these kind of failures in future, but it is not a pre-requisite for fixing this bug. 8u is built on a wide range of compilers and isolating the warning change to an individual fix makes it easier to deal with any impact.

@gnu-andrew: ok, sounds reasonable, no problem!

-------------

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/jdk8u-dev/pull/532#issuecomment-2206601308