Proposal to revise forest graph and integration practices for JDK 9

[David Holmes]

On 25/11/2013 11:15 AM, Joe Darcy wrote:
> On 11/24/2013 4:17 AM, Alan Bateman wrote:
>> Probably a separate discussion but one thing that is not clear to many
>> of us is the relationship between the hsx and jdk8 projects (some
>> people have different roles in one vs. the other). Are hsx roles
>> applicable in the JDK 9 project and the proposed structure? I'm just
>> thinking of someone pushing to hotspot + jdk at the same time and
>> whether they need to wear more than one shirt.
>>
>
> That is a relevant point to raise. I think it would be a fine
> simplification if those who have a certain status in the hsx project
> were initialized to have the same status in the jdk9 project, similar to
> what is done for the jdk8 -> jdk9 transition.

I don't agree. I think this undermines the whole premise of the 
qualifications for being an Author/Committer/Reviewer. Just because you 
have those qualifications for hotspot does not mean you have them for 
library changes - and vice versa. Maybe it is okay for Committers 
(Author is a redundant role that should be deprecated) but not for 
Reviewers.

We should also clarify the approval process for pushing to the different 
branches of this new forest ie number of Reviewers and where they "reside".

David

> Thanks,
>
> -Joe
>