From dholmes at openjdk.org  Mon Jun  3 05:19:01 2024
From: dholmes at openjdk.org (David Holmes)
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 05:19:01 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2272: Improve issuestitleCheck [v2]
In-Reply-To: <yrL7advD2q4BRsMEfdQE8uXCbFxP7HGZ0naW7a_x284=.35b29311-1260-46fc-ae32-f0ea1aa76dae@github.com>
References: <wiHuaPvpGahEprPZZODi9RwGBX57QWzMSs-QxDrZ-0k=.731bee62-4460-45d6-bd52-fdf36f0d3324@github.com>
 <1grzUYpQ_gvP2EpiYFNb7DnKMopa_0lQeyZPyO9NTek=.5e88a55f-6f9c-4dbf-87f5-35d52585299e@github.com>
 <PpbjuuymqVT0G5SR-ZKXmoCzuYWfYbBakf7d5bUJ5m0=.5903202c-05bb-4775-a6be-ed3e64b92276@github.com>
 <yrL7advD2q4BRsMEfdQE8uXCbFxP7HGZ0naW7a_x284=.35b29311-1260-46fc-ae32-f0ea1aa76dae@github.com>
Message-ID: <9AfVlpX_FZPLurfFh1xJMXnnBygS1PPDwKkuma1CVOA=.649926e6-efd2-4f8f-ba22-c4c8f54a71a9@github.com>

On Fri, 31 May 2024 23:38:41 GMT, Erik Joelsson <erikj at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> I was thinking we should ask if David Holmes has any thoughts about this list...
>
> No I think it should just be removed. Otherwise we will end up having to list every executable in the JDK as well as basically every build tool used when building it, and even so, that would be a very JDK project specific list of executables. Several of those would also overlap with words that we would want to flag, e.g. "make", "java".

Honestly, while I appreciate the attempt to improve this, I don't see what the rules are trying to achieve. This is not a grammatical context, and the no-period rule means this is not expected to be a sentence; and we are not trying to enforce title-case so ... what exactly does "Should start with a capital" achieve - especially with all the noted, if not programmed, exceptions?

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1653#discussion_r1623794185

From zsong at openjdk.org  Mon Jun  3 17:07:51 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 17:07:51 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2272: Improve issuestitleCheck [v2]
In-Reply-To: <9AfVlpX_FZPLurfFh1xJMXnnBygS1PPDwKkuma1CVOA=.649926e6-efd2-4f8f-ba22-c4c8f54a71a9@github.com>
References: <wiHuaPvpGahEprPZZODi9RwGBX57QWzMSs-QxDrZ-0k=.731bee62-4460-45d6-bd52-fdf36f0d3324@github.com>
 <1grzUYpQ_gvP2EpiYFNb7DnKMopa_0lQeyZPyO9NTek=.5e88a55f-6f9c-4dbf-87f5-35d52585299e@github.com>
 <PpbjuuymqVT0G5SR-ZKXmoCzuYWfYbBakf7d5bUJ5m0=.5903202c-05bb-4775-a6be-ed3e64b92276@github.com>
 <yrL7advD2q4BRsMEfdQE8uXCbFxP7HGZ0naW7a_x284=.35b29311-1260-46fc-ae32-f0ea1aa76dae@github.com>
 <9AfVlpX_FZPLurfFh1xJMXnnBygS1PPDwKkuma1CVOA=.649926e6-efd2-4f8f-ba22-c4c8f54a71a9@github.com>
Message-ID: <w6IGYZ7xS4sfN3pULyEbXGCWO9Bp8asCZK1wYHSVWJ8=.94b87207-ebcb-43fc-aabe-0353f2cc5bf2@github.com>

On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 05:16:53 GMT, David Holmes <dholmes at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> No I think it should just be removed. Otherwise we will end up having to list every executable in the JDK as well as basically every build tool used when building it, and even so, that would be a very JDK project specific list of executables. Several of those would also overlap with words that we would want to flag, e.g. "make", "java".
>
> Honestly, while I appreciate the attempt to improve this, I don't see what the rules are trying to achieve. This is not a grammatical context, and the no-period rule means this is not expected to be a sentence; and we are not trying to enforce title-case so ... what exactly does "Should start with a capital" achieve - especially with all the noted, if not programmed, exceptions?

@dholmes-ora There are more details in the issue description. https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2248

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1653#discussion_r1624789759

From zsong at openjdk.org  Mon Jun  3 17:11:13 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 17:11:13 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2272: Improve issuestitleCheck [v3]
In-Reply-To: <wiHuaPvpGahEprPZZODi9RwGBX57QWzMSs-QxDrZ-0k=.731bee62-4460-45d6-bd52-fdf36f0d3324@github.com>
References: <wiHuaPvpGahEprPZZODi9RwGBX57QWzMSs-QxDrZ-0k=.731bee62-4460-45d6-bd52-fdf36f0d3324@github.com>
Message-ID: <cpZ80J2J6RHEeEWI1Q69DJm-UbH3UjAag6iwIONnC0Q=.441e414a-8fe0-4082-88fd-7ef515eb6b41@github.com>

> IssuestitleCheck was enabled in jdk recently, but this seems triggers too many false positive warnings and makes people feel annoying.
> 
> In this patch, I am trying to make the issuestitle check more tolerant. For some known cases, issuestitle check wouldn't generate issues.

Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  remove executable list

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1653/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1653/files/9b0dcc3b..3a41d05f

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1653&range=02
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1653&range=01-02

  Stats: 11 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 10 del; 1 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1653.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1653/head:pull/1653

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1653

From erikj at openjdk.org  Mon Jun  3 18:02:59 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 18:02:59 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2272: Improve issuestitleCheck [v3]
In-Reply-To: <cpZ80J2J6RHEeEWI1Q69DJm-UbH3UjAag6iwIONnC0Q=.441e414a-8fe0-4082-88fd-7ef515eb6b41@github.com>
References: <wiHuaPvpGahEprPZZODi9RwGBX57QWzMSs-QxDrZ-0k=.731bee62-4460-45d6-bd52-fdf36f0d3324@github.com>
 <cpZ80J2J6RHEeEWI1Q69DJm-UbH3UjAag6iwIONnC0Q=.441e414a-8fe0-4082-88fd-7ef515eb6b41@github.com>
Message-ID: <m-4WQKd9dH3icBZ8n4q8ZvToKchd17pF9X9XGZA--yc=.27874aac-ae32-4967-92dd-8db5ed54e338@github.com>

On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 17:11:13 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> IssuestitleCheck was enabled in jdk recently, but this seems triggers too many false positive warnings and makes people feel annoying.
>> 
>> In this patch, I am trying to make the issuestitle check more tolerant. For some known cases, issuestitle check wouldn't generate issues.
>
> Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   remove executable list

Marked as reviewed by erikj (Lead).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1653#pullrequestreview-2094536621

From zsong at openjdk.org  Mon Jun  3 18:12:29 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 18:12:29 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2272: Improve issuestitleCheck [v3]
In-Reply-To: <cpZ80J2J6RHEeEWI1Q69DJm-UbH3UjAag6iwIONnC0Q=.441e414a-8fe0-4082-88fd-7ef515eb6b41@github.com>
References: <wiHuaPvpGahEprPZZODi9RwGBX57QWzMSs-QxDrZ-0k=.731bee62-4460-45d6-bd52-fdf36f0d3324@github.com>
 <cpZ80J2J6RHEeEWI1Q69DJm-UbH3UjAag6iwIONnC0Q=.441e414a-8fe0-4082-88fd-7ef515eb6b41@github.com>
Message-ID: <wOcMguSUNmRI-kJu_H2hH_n0e64snsqpfv_H_P9moNs=.c403ce58-bcd0-454a-8eb0-97de70fdfa2e@github.com>

On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 17:11:13 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> IssuestitleCheck was enabled in jdk recently, but this seems triggers too many false positive warnings and makes people feel annoying.
>> 
>> In this patch, I am trying to make the issuestitle check more tolerant. For some known cases, issuestitle check wouldn't generate issues.
>
> Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   remove executable list

Thanks for the review!

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1653#issuecomment-2145827424

From zsong at openjdk.org  Mon Jun  3 18:12:29 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 18:12:29 GMT
Subject: Integrated: 2272: Improve issuestitleCheck
In-Reply-To: <wiHuaPvpGahEprPZZODi9RwGBX57QWzMSs-QxDrZ-0k=.731bee62-4460-45d6-bd52-fdf36f0d3324@github.com>
References: <wiHuaPvpGahEprPZZODi9RwGBX57QWzMSs-QxDrZ-0k=.731bee62-4460-45d6-bd52-fdf36f0d3324@github.com>
Message-ID: <Uwypy8mG_VPg0i72LHskpiRfEwYRIRQvwQyMePk7hRc=.be1f327c-9e0c-493f-8a6c-d06adb108605@github.com>

On Fri, 31 May 2024 19:02:09 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> IssuestitleCheck was enabled in jdk recently, but this seems triggers too many false positive warnings and makes people feel annoying.
> 
> In this patch, I am trying to make the issuestitle check more tolerant. For some known cases, issuestitle check wouldn't generate issues.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 53601bbe
Author:    Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/skara/commit/53601bbe4b6e6272cc403337a6977f7941a06f79
Stats:     28 lines in 2 files changed: 24 ins; 0 del; 4 mod

2272: Improve issuestitleCheck

Reviewed-by: erikj

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1653

From zsong at openjdk.org  Mon Jun  3 21:14:34 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Mon, 3 Jun 2024 21:14:34 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2258: Skara won't allow "/csr unneeded" after CSR has been
 Withdrawn
Message-ID: <_YkAn_bO0eDyCzdI55HTn4yUxTmXpxIR6W156UjFEk4=.bd885881-e93f-4f0c-b009-73645bc0f6d0@github.com>

When processing "/csr unneeded" command, skara bot will use pr body to check if there are any open csrs  associated with the pr. However, there is a race condition here, after the user withdraws the csr, the bot needs some time to update the pr body. Therefore, if the user issues "/csr unneeded" immediately after withdrawing the csr in JBS, it's very likely that the bot would use stale pr body and make the wrong judgement.

I think the solution here is that when the bot finds existing csrs, the bot should fetch the csrs from JBS and double check if the csr issue is still open. Since the case is not very common, I believe this won't add many GET requests.

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

Commit messages:
 - SKARA-2258

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1654/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1654&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2258
  Stats: 11 lines in 2 files changed: 8 ins; 0 del; 3 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1654.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1654/head:pull/1654

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1654

From erikj at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 12:53:10 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 12:53:10 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2258: Skara won't allow "/csr unneeded" after CSR has been
 Withdrawn
In-Reply-To: <_YkAn_bO0eDyCzdI55HTn4yUxTmXpxIR6W156UjFEk4=.bd885881-e93f-4f0c-b009-73645bc0f6d0@github.com>
References: <_YkAn_bO0eDyCzdI55HTn4yUxTmXpxIR6W156UjFEk4=.bd885881-e93f-4f0c-b009-73645bc0f6d0@github.com>
Message-ID: <aUQlD2cy8fAsI6EKnmCGCpQWgC3IpiNyUf5d75xgM9U=.eac087d5-d938-4c50-ab3e-0e9eaf716e83@github.com>

On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 20:45:42 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> When processing "/csr unneeded" command, skara bot will use pr body to check if there are any open csrs  associated with the pr. However, there is a race condition here, after the user withdraws the csr, the bot needs some time to update the pr body. Therefore, if the user issues "/csr unneeded" immediately after withdrawing the csr in JBS, it's very likely that the bot would use stale pr body and make the wrong judgement.
> 
> I think the solution here is that when the bot finds existing csrs, the bot should fetch the csrs from JBS and double check if the csr issue is still open. Since the case is not very common, I believe this won't add many GET requests.

I think this looks good. You aren't adding a new test so have you verified this in some other way or are the existing tests enough to cover it?

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

Marked as reviewed by erikj (Lead).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1654#pullrequestreview-2096300478

From zsong at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 15:58:23 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 15:58:23 GMT
Subject: Integrated: 2277: Integer Overflow when parsing GitHub comment id
In-Reply-To: <lMEJ63gLVuyKQJ_kyMzDD0SHdQRuWc9Ek-qmIFkvsBk=.418c1c0d-ba49-41f7-9cc9-d606bd86b451@github.com>
References: <lMEJ63gLVuyKQJ_kyMzDD0SHdQRuWc9Ek-qmIFkvsBk=.418c1c0d-ba49-41f7-9cc9-d606bd86b451@github.com>
Message-ID: <A_Cz-M6ypaDmjAGBeSnDwI5sv7CFzKYrOSNEd2BylXU=.07c186dc-03c9-4981-92bc-c384ef0cba06@github.com>

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 15:27:44 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> When parsing the comment id from Github, skara bot would convert the JSONValue to integer, then convert integer to string and now this is causing integer overflow.
> 
> I thought we should just convert it from JSONValue to String.
> But Erik pointed out this won't work. We should convert it to long and convert long to string

Thank you for the quick review!

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1655#issuecomment-2147880796

From zsong at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 15:58:23 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 15:58:23 GMT
Subject: Integrated: 2277: Integer Overflow when parsing GitHub comment id
In-Reply-To: <lMEJ63gLVuyKQJ_kyMzDD0SHdQRuWc9Ek-qmIFkvsBk=.418c1c0d-ba49-41f7-9cc9-d606bd86b451@github.com>
References: <lMEJ63gLVuyKQJ_kyMzDD0SHdQRuWc9Ek-qmIFkvsBk=.418c1c0d-ba49-41f7-9cc9-d606bd86b451@github.com>
Message-ID: <OCH6jm7p93orXbOI5MbXIMBMy3PyHwD27ZXYt-D3EwQ=.d392d1ec-0eeb-45dd-88b0-02700b0b9854@github.com>

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 15:27:44 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> When parsing the comment id from Github, skara bot would convert the JSONValue to integer, then convert integer to string and now this is causing integer overflow.
> 
> I thought we should just convert it from JSONValue to String.
> But Erik pointed out this won't work. We should convert it to long and convert long to string

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 963e380a
Author:    Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/skara/commit/963e380a1297072aa94d7b09e0b58accf20a36e9
Stats:     1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod

2277: Integer Overflow when parsing GitHub comment id

Reviewed-by: erikj

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1655

From erikj at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 15:58:23 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 15:58:23 GMT
Subject: Integrated: 2277: Integer Overflow when parsing GitHub comment id
In-Reply-To: <lMEJ63gLVuyKQJ_kyMzDD0SHdQRuWc9Ek-qmIFkvsBk=.418c1c0d-ba49-41f7-9cc9-d606bd86b451@github.com>
References: <lMEJ63gLVuyKQJ_kyMzDD0SHdQRuWc9Ek-qmIFkvsBk=.418c1c0d-ba49-41f7-9cc9-d606bd86b451@github.com>
Message-ID: <1H1FByfMnvzQT9YXwERvO3K-12JGBQslyIO95ANSdEQ=.a59f9f81-b6c3-461f-9cb5-d90661203bfd@github.com>

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 15:27:44 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> When parsing the comment id from Github, skara bot would convert the JSONValue to integer, then convert integer to string and now this is causing integer overflow.
> 
> I thought we should just convert it from JSONValue to String.
> But Erik pointed out this won't work. We should convert it to long and convert long to string

Marked as reviewed by erikj (Lead).

I don't think this will work. JSONNumber.asString() throws exception.

Marked as reviewed by erikj (Lead).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1655#pullrequestreview-2096773355
Changes requested by erikj (Lead).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1655#pullrequestreview-2096782165
PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1655#pullrequestreview-2096817498

From zsong at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 15:58:23 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 15:58:23 GMT
Subject: Integrated: 2277: Integer Overflow when parsing GitHub comment id
Message-ID: <lMEJ63gLVuyKQJ_kyMzDD0SHdQRuWc9Ek-qmIFkvsBk=.418c1c0d-ba49-41f7-9cc9-d606bd86b451@github.com>

When parsing the comment id from Github, skara bot would convert the JSONValue to integer, then convert integer to string and now this is causing integer overflow.

I thought we should just convert it from JSONValue to String.
But Erik pointed out this won't work. We should convert it to long and convert long to string

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

Commit messages:
 - Use Long
 - SKARA-2277

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1655/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1655&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2277
  Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1655.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1655/head:pull/1655

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1655

From zsong at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 17:13:42 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 17:13:42 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2258: Skara won't allow "/csr unneeded" after CSR has been
 Withdrawn
In-Reply-To: <_YkAn_bO0eDyCzdI55HTn4yUxTmXpxIR6W156UjFEk4=.bd885881-e93f-4f0c-b009-73645bc0f6d0@github.com>
References: <_YkAn_bO0eDyCzdI55HTn4yUxTmXpxIR6W156UjFEk4=.bd885881-e93f-4f0c-b009-73645bc0f6d0@github.com>
Message-ID: <u69B_NYe2H8FGOUVHI_Nn4-jXBhEuzBQ0Vb1-5ohvvo=.3abb5283-a89d-44c1-bfbc-8cb4c8efa0f3@github.com>

On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 20:45:42 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> When processing "/csr unneeded" command, skara bot will use pr body to check if there are any open csrs  associated with the pr. However, there is a race condition here, after the user withdraws the csr, the bot needs some time to update the pr body. Therefore, if the user issues "/csr unneeded" immediately after withdrawing the csr in JBS, it's very likely that the bot would use stale pr body and make the wrong judgement.
> 
> I think the solution here is that when the bot finds existing csrs, the bot should fetch the csrs from JBS and double check if the csr issue is still open. Since the case is not very common, I believe this won't add many GET requests.

Thank you for the review!

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1654#issuecomment-2148022711

From zsong at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 17:13:42 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 17:13:42 GMT
Subject: Integrated: 2258: Skara won't allow "/csr unneeded" after CSR has been
 Withdrawn
In-Reply-To: <_YkAn_bO0eDyCzdI55HTn4yUxTmXpxIR6W156UjFEk4=.bd885881-e93f-4f0c-b009-73645bc0f6d0@github.com>
References: <_YkAn_bO0eDyCzdI55HTn4yUxTmXpxIR6W156UjFEk4=.bd885881-e93f-4f0c-b009-73645bc0f6d0@github.com>
Message-ID: <P7YisLADMvqY1sYcen6kaZdbAQDXuz7uBXG1hgAd6Uc=.2e36b362-0c36-462c-94c7-bdeca0f2985a@github.com>

On Mon, 3 Jun 2024 20:45:42 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> When processing "/csr unneeded" command, skara bot will use pr body to check if there are any open csrs  associated with the pr. However, there is a race condition here, after the user withdraws the csr, the bot needs some time to update the pr body. Therefore, if the user issues "/csr unneeded" immediately after withdrawing the csr in JBS, it's very likely that the bot would use stale pr body and make the wrong judgement.
> 
> I think the solution here is that when the bot finds existing csrs, the bot should fetch the csrs from JBS and double check if the csr issue is still open. Since the case is not very common, I believe this won't add many GET requests.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: c6aeba84
Author:    Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/skara/commit/c6aeba8415a157b9b98c0b90baee674f62e2aaa7
Stats:     11 lines in 2 files changed: 8 ins; 0 del; 3 mod

2258: Skara won't allow "/csr unneeded" after CSR has been Withdrawn

Reviewed-by: erikj

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1654

From zsong at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 17:15:40 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 17:15:40 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2278: Issuestitle Check shouldn't treat special character as
 leading lowercase letter
Message-ID: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>

Currently, in IssuesTitleCheck::hasLeadingLowercaseLetter, the method checks if the leading character is uppercase, if so, it returns false. Otherwise, it will treat the character as lowercase. This is wrong because it treats special characters as lowercase letters. The solution is to make the method to check if the leading character is a lowercase letter.

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

Commit messages:
 - SKARA-2278

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1656&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2278
  Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1656/head:pull/1656

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656

From kcr at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 18:23:41 2024
From: kcr at openjdk.org (Kevin Rushforth)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 18:23:41 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2278: Issuestitle Check shouldn't treat special character as
 leading lowercase letter
In-Reply-To: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
References: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
Message-ID: <uxVi96zc_aSBrtY9eSqu6QkPhgHYRm6_M80f-2qSeKw=.4b11f0dd-eb39-40f0-9d14-3d3a95cd58c2@github.com>

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 17:09:46 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Currently, in IssuesTitleCheck::hasLeadingLowercaseLetter, the method checks if the leading character is uppercase, if so, it returns false. Otherwise, it will treat the character as lowercase. This is wrong because it treats special characters as lowercase letters. The solution is to make the method to check if the leading character is a lowercase letter.

This change will fix this specific problem, but I wonder if it would be better to step back and rethink this check. The main thing this check is trying to catch is the case of an all lower-case initial word, so I would test for _that_ rather than checking that the initial word starts with a lower-case letter and doesn't contain certain other characters.

Something like this:


Pattern ALL_LOWER_CASE = Pattern.compile("[a-z]+");
...

    boolean hasLeadingLowerCaseWord(String description) {
        var firstWord = description.split(" ")[0];
        return ALL_LOWER_CASE.matcher(description).matches();
    }


Then you can get rid of the `FILE_OR_FUNCTION_PATTERN` regex.

This has the benefit of not warning on any camel case word (e.g., "macOS") and also means you won't have to keep adding special characters to the `FILE_OR_FUNCTION_PATTERN` (which I predict you will otherwise have to do at some point)

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656#issuecomment-2148140420

From zsong at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 18:33:11 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 18:33:11 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2278: Issuestitle Check shouldn't treat special character as
 leading lowercase letter
In-Reply-To: <uxVi96zc_aSBrtY9eSqu6QkPhgHYRm6_M80f-2qSeKw=.4b11f0dd-eb39-40f0-9d14-3d3a95cd58c2@github.com>
References: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
 <uxVi96zc_aSBrtY9eSqu6QkPhgHYRm6_M80f-2qSeKw=.4b11f0dd-eb39-40f0-9d14-3d3a95cd58c2@github.com>
Message-ID: <J8UT_eLYHogx9G4PdyDwvy95wHA8ZmS0gqijn5jn9mY=.dd937357-8072-4013-8b8b-96bf8f8bfd51@github.com>

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 18:21:37 GMT, Kevin Rushforth <kcr at openjdk.org> wrote:

> This change will fix this specific problem, but I wonder if it would be better to step back and rethink this check. The main thing this check is trying to catch is the case of an all lower-case initial word, so I would test for _that_ rather than checking that the initial word starts with a lower-case letter and doesn't contain certain other characters.
> 
> Something like this:
> 
> ```
> Pattern ALL_LOWER_CASE = Pattern.compile("[a-z]+");
> ...
> 
>     boolean hasLeadingLowerCaseWord(String description) {
>         var firstWord = description.split(" ")[0];
>         return ALL_LOWER_CASE.matcher(description).matches();
>     }
> ```
> 
> Then you can get rid of the `FILE_OR_FUNCTION_PATTERN` regex.
> 
> This has the benefit of not warning on any camel case word (e.g., "macOS") and also means you won't have to keep adding special characters to the `FILE_OR_FUNCTION_PATTERN` (which I predict you will otherwise have to do at some point)

Seems like it's a good idea. I will think of it. Thank you!

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656#issuecomment-2148159023

From zsong at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 18:47:48 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 18:47:48 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2278: Issuestitle Check shouldn't treat special character as
 leading lowercase letter [v2]
In-Reply-To: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
References: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
Message-ID: <Fu6Ko0Oo-B2oT6w8oNEdj5UR8RMykJzRZOmhvUM23Yo=.5baaecdd-1a43-4e34-9847-5a749282e078@github.com>

> Currently, in IssuesTitleCheck::hasLeadingLowercaseLetter, the method checks if the leading character is uppercase, if so, it returns false. Otherwise, it will treat the character as lowercase. This is wrong because it treats special characters as lowercase letters. The solution is to make the method to check if the leading character is a lowercase letter.

Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  update

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656/files/f0c70f70..b172940c

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1656&range=01
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1656&range=00-01

  Stats: 7 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 5 del; 2 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1656/head:pull/1656

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656

From kcr at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 19:41:42 2024
From: kcr at openjdk.org (Kevin Rushforth)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 19:41:42 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2278: Issuestitle Check shouldn't treat special character as
 leading lowercase letter [v2]
In-Reply-To: <Fu6Ko0Oo-B2oT6w8oNEdj5UR8RMykJzRZOmhvUM23Yo=.5baaecdd-1a43-4e34-9847-5a749282e078@github.com>
References: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
 <Fu6Ko0Oo-B2oT6w8oNEdj5UR8RMykJzRZOmhvUM23Yo=.5baaecdd-1a43-4e34-9847-5a749282e078@github.com>
Message-ID: <kBORhaIprx3BU9vzggwbAUsSPNjSusF8UbvPItwebjY=.209c4743-fd79-46dd-817e-3e93dffc997d@github.com>

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 18:47:48 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Currently, in IssuesTitleCheck::hasLeadingLowercaseLetter, the method checks if the leading character is uppercase, if so, it returns false. Otherwise, it will treat the character as lowercase. This is wrong because it treats special characters as lowercase letters. The solution is to make the method to check if the leading character is a lowercase letter.
>
> Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   update

Looks good, but I would wait for Erik. I left one question.

jcheck/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/jcheck/IssuesTitleCheck.java line 91:

> 89: 
> 90:     private boolean hasLeadingLowerCaseLetter(String description) {
> 91:         return ALL_LOWER_CASE_PATTERN.matcher(description.split(" ")[0]).matches();

I presume that `description` has been `trim`med? If so, then this should be fine without additional checks.

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656#pullrequestreview-2097246737
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656#discussion_r1626518215

From erikj at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 19:48:15 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 19:48:15 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2278: Issuestitle Check shouldn't treat special character as
 leading lowercase letter [v2]
In-Reply-To: <Fu6Ko0Oo-B2oT6w8oNEdj5UR8RMykJzRZOmhvUM23Yo=.5baaecdd-1a43-4e34-9847-5a749282e078@github.com>
References: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
 <Fu6Ko0Oo-B2oT6w8oNEdj5UR8RMykJzRZOmhvUM23Yo=.5baaecdd-1a43-4e34-9847-5a749282e078@github.com>
Message-ID: <6SJHxQ4zzS0jirnt84IZp5e2nOrrnHEU11nZWjdub9g=.e150a4f2-4386-4bb7-ab28-22494d9f592d@github.com>

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 18:47:48 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Currently, in IssuesTitleCheck::hasLeadingLowercaseLetter, the method checks if the leading character is uppercase, if so, it returns false. Otherwise, it will treat the character as lowercase. This is wrong because it treats special characters as lowercase letters. The solution is to make the method to check if the leading character is a lowercase letter.
>
> Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   update

jcheck/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/jcheck/IssuesTitleCheck.java line 91:

> 89: 
> 90:     private boolean hasLeadingLowerCaseLetter(String description) {
> 91:         return ALL_LOWER_CASE_PATTERN.matcher(description.split(" ")[0]).matches();

This could all be captured in the regex instead of splitting the string first. Something like `"[a-z]+(:?\\h.*)?"` should do it I think.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656#discussion_r1626517594

From kcr at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 20:12:15 2024
From: kcr at openjdk.org (Kevin Rushforth)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 20:12:15 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2278: Issuestitle Check shouldn't treat special character as
 leading lowercase letter [v2]
In-Reply-To: <6SJHxQ4zzS0jirnt84IZp5e2nOrrnHEU11nZWjdub9g=.e150a4f2-4386-4bb7-ab28-22494d9f592d@github.com>
References: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
 <Fu6Ko0Oo-B2oT6w8oNEdj5UR8RMykJzRZOmhvUM23Yo=.5baaecdd-1a43-4e34-9847-5a749282e078@github.com>
 <6SJHxQ4zzS0jirnt84IZp5e2nOrrnHEU11nZWjdub9g=.e150a4f2-4386-4bb7-ab28-22494d9f592d@github.com>
Message-ID: <795gTbYJg6M_PWFjvlLYBSsBJ_k8V2p5wMoK3lO7rJQ=.140b2133-973b-4e8b-9432-0edc911887f5@github.com>

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 19:38:12 GMT, Erik Joelsson <erikj at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   update
>
> jcheck/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/jcheck/IssuesTitleCheck.java line 91:
> 
>> 89: 
>> 90:     private boolean hasLeadingLowerCaseLetter(String description) {
>> 91:         return ALL_LOWER_CASE_PATTERN.matcher(description.split(" ")[0]).matches();
> 
> This could all be captured in the regex instead of splitting the string first. Something like `"[a-z]+(:?\\h.*)?"` should do it I think.

Is the `:?` needed? It seems redundant, but I'm not a regex expert.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656#discussion_r1626549953

From zsong at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 20:14:58 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 20:14:58 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2278: Issuestitle Check shouldn't treat special character as
 leading lowercase letter [v2]
In-Reply-To: <kBORhaIprx3BU9vzggwbAUsSPNjSusF8UbvPItwebjY=.209c4743-fd79-46dd-817e-3e93dffc997d@github.com>
References: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
 <Fu6Ko0Oo-B2oT6w8oNEdj5UR8RMykJzRZOmhvUM23Yo=.5baaecdd-1a43-4e34-9847-5a749282e078@github.com>
 <kBORhaIprx3BU9vzggwbAUsSPNjSusF8UbvPItwebjY=.209c4743-fd79-46dd-817e-3e93dffc997d@github.com>
Message-ID: <WZYSovIc-1rEqOA69H6PneuWgLiH2DzvWEktPJxfLvc=.54aab5e2-764f-4bdd-8f85-cfc34b793c29@github.com>

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 19:38:47 GMT, Kevin Rushforth <kcr at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
>> 
>>   update
>
> jcheck/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/jcheck/IssuesTitleCheck.java line 91:
> 
>> 89: 
>> 90:     private boolean hasLeadingLowerCaseLetter(String description) {
>> 91:         return ALL_LOWER_CASE_PATTERN.matcher(description.split(" ")[0]).matches();
> 
> I presume that `description` has been `trim`med? If so, then this should be fine without additional checks.

Yes, the description has been trimmed

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656#discussion_r1626552532

From zsong at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 20:20:56 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 20:20:56 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2278: Issuestitle Check shouldn't treat special character as
 leading lowercase letter [v2]
In-Reply-To: <795gTbYJg6M_PWFjvlLYBSsBJ_k8V2p5wMoK3lO7rJQ=.140b2133-973b-4e8b-9432-0edc911887f5@github.com>
References: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
 <Fu6Ko0Oo-B2oT6w8oNEdj5UR8RMykJzRZOmhvUM23Yo=.5baaecdd-1a43-4e34-9847-5a749282e078@github.com>
 <6SJHxQ4zzS0jirnt84IZp5e2nOrrnHEU11nZWjdub9g=.e150a4f2-4386-4bb7-ab28-22494d9f592d@github.com>
 <795gTbYJg6M_PWFjvlLYBSsBJ_k8V2p5wMoK3lO7rJQ=.140b2133-973b-4e8b-9432-0edc911887f5@github.com>
Message-ID: <W2JyK76izA-ja056uKVOJ_bb8Sc901O9S1GKJw-rOAc=.e0de207d-5566-4e1d-be6b-0315728679d5@github.com>

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 20:10:08 GMT, Kevin Rushforth <kcr at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> jcheck/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/jcheck/IssuesTitleCheck.java line 91:
>> 
>>> 89: 
>>> 90:     private boolean hasLeadingLowerCaseLetter(String description) {
>>> 91:         return ALL_LOWER_CASE_PATTERN.matcher(description.split(" ")[0]).matches();
>> 
>> This could all be captured in the regex instead of splitting the string first. Something like `"[a-z]+(:?\\h.*)?"` should do it I think.
>
> Is the `:?` needed? It seems redundant, but I'm not a regex expert.

I think Erik has a typo here, should be `"[a-z]+(?:\\h.*)?"`?

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656#discussion_r1626555807

From kcr at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 20:20:56 2024
From: kcr at openjdk.org (Kevin Rushforth)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 20:20:56 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2278: Issuestitle Check shouldn't treat special character as
 leading lowercase letter [v2]
In-Reply-To: <W2JyK76izA-ja056uKVOJ_bb8Sc901O9S1GKJw-rOAc=.e0de207d-5566-4e1d-be6b-0315728679d5@github.com>
References: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
 <Fu6Ko0Oo-B2oT6w8oNEdj5UR8RMykJzRZOmhvUM23Yo=.5baaecdd-1a43-4e34-9847-5a749282e078@github.com>
 <6SJHxQ4zzS0jirnt84IZp5e2nOrrnHEU11nZWjdub9g=.e150a4f2-4386-4bb7-ab28-22494d9f592d@github.com>
 <795gTbYJg6M_PWFjvlLYBSsBJ_k8V2p5wMoK3lO7rJQ=.140b2133-973b-4e8b-9432-0edc911887f5@github.com>
 <W2JyK76izA-ja056uKVOJ_bb8Sc901O9S1GKJw-rOAc=.e0de207d-5566-4e1d-be6b-0315728679d5@github.com>
Message-ID: <b3E6WzsuOrzTywGT_gS9jPTmW9tA5ijDOzlk3nNlrL4=.d29ede09-f57f-4e06-aeb3-5961833b9a4a@github.com>

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 20:16:19 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Is the `:?` needed? It seems redundant, but I'm not a regex expert.
>
> I think Erik has a typo here, should be `"[a-z]+(?:\\h.*)?"`?

On closer look, the "`:?`" won't do what we want. It will match one of the patterns we explicitly do not want to match: `"abc: def"`. So I think that should just be: `"[a-z]+(\\h.*)?"`

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656#discussion_r1626557165

From zsong at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 20:20:56 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 20:20:56 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2278: Issuestitle Check shouldn't treat special character as
 leading lowercase letter [v2]
In-Reply-To: <b3E6WzsuOrzTywGT_gS9jPTmW9tA5ijDOzlk3nNlrL4=.d29ede09-f57f-4e06-aeb3-5961833b9a4a@github.com>
References: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
 <Fu6Ko0Oo-B2oT6w8oNEdj5UR8RMykJzRZOmhvUM23Yo=.5baaecdd-1a43-4e34-9847-5a749282e078@github.com>
 <6SJHxQ4zzS0jirnt84IZp5e2nOrrnHEU11nZWjdub9g=.e150a4f2-4386-4bb7-ab28-22494d9f592d@github.com>
 <795gTbYJg6M_PWFjvlLYBSsBJ_k8V2p5wMoK3lO7rJQ=.140b2133-973b-4e8b-9432-0edc911887f5@github.com>
 <W2JyK76izA-ja056uKVOJ_bb8Sc901O9S1GKJw-rOAc=.e0de207d-5566-4e1d-be6b-0315728679d5@github.com>
 <b3E6WzsuOrzTywGT_gS9jPTmW9tA5ijDOzlk3nNlrL4=.d29ede09-f57f-4e06-aeb3-5961833b9a4a@github.com>
Message-ID: <hDVB8lMmGjoDlkBtX7N-WUQbsrx4yGFs3_dRq5xqZHQ=.cef5eedf-8bfe-4154-bcbc-91d24e3caba1@github.com>

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 20:17:45 GMT, Kevin Rushforth <kcr at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> I think Erik has a typo here, should be `"[a-z]+(?:\\h.*)?"`?
>
> On closer look, the "`:?`" won't do what we want. It will match one of the patterns we explicitly do not want to match: `"abc: def"`. So I think that should just be: `"[a-z]+(\\h.*)?"`

I think Erik was trying to use the non-capturing pattern `?:...`

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656#discussion_r1626558261

From kcr at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 20:56:55 2024
From: kcr at openjdk.org (Kevin Rushforth)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 20:56:55 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2278: Issuestitle Check shouldn't treat special character as
 leading lowercase letter [v2]
In-Reply-To: <hDVB8lMmGjoDlkBtX7N-WUQbsrx4yGFs3_dRq5xqZHQ=.cef5eedf-8bfe-4154-bcbc-91d24e3caba1@github.com>
References: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
 <Fu6Ko0Oo-B2oT6w8oNEdj5UR8RMykJzRZOmhvUM23Yo=.5baaecdd-1a43-4e34-9847-5a749282e078@github.com>
 <6SJHxQ4zzS0jirnt84IZp5e2nOrrnHEU11nZWjdub9g=.e150a4f2-4386-4bb7-ab28-22494d9f592d@github.com>
 <795gTbYJg6M_PWFjvlLYBSsBJ_k8V2p5wMoK3lO7rJQ=.140b2133-973b-4e8b-9432-0edc911887f5@github.com>
 <W2JyK76izA-ja056uKVOJ_bb8Sc901O9S1GKJw-rOAc=.e0de207d-5566-4e1d-be6b-0315728679d5@github.com>
 <b3E6WzsuOrzTywGT_gS9jPTmW9tA5ijDOzlk3nNlrL4=.d29ede09-f57f-4e06-aeb3-5961833b9a4a@github.com>
 <hDVB8lMmGjoDlkBtX7N-WUQbsrx4yGFs3_dRq5xqZHQ=.cef5eedf-8bfe-4154-bcbc-91d24e3caba1@github.com>
Message-ID: <5s0HZPBXotwkH340XwsVM1al2kG1Waq4BFxIvobVfNM=.e6d58a17-0566-4e2a-a11d-7b06c65b36ae@github.com>

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 20:18:52 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> On closer look, the "`:?`" won't do what we want. It will match one of the patterns we explicitly do not want to match: `"abc: def"`. So I think that should just be: `"[a-z]+(\\h.*)?"`
>
> I think Erik was trying to use the non-capturing pattern `?:...`

Ah, you may be right (in which case _that_ would be fine).

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656#discussion_r1626592802

From zsong at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 21:08:10 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 21:08:10 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2278: Issuestitle Check shouldn't treat special character as
 leading lowercase letter [v3]
In-Reply-To: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
References: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
Message-ID: <hm6uDbkGjMJpBVYjKg6VhoF3kkym6oF54AiqfM0e6ps=.d744636c-7b93-4ae5-931e-09f91a67b396@github.com>

> Currently, in IssuesTitleCheck::hasLeadingLowercaseLetter, the method checks if the leading character is uppercase, if so, it returns false. Otherwise, it will treat the character as lowercase. This is wrong because it treats special characters as lowercase letters. The solution is to make the method to check if the leading character is a lowercase letter.

Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  review comment

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656/files/b172940c..25ad6e9c

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1656&range=02
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1656&range=01-02

  Stats: 10 lines in 2 files changed: 0 ins; 4 del; 6 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1656/head:pull/1656

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656

From kcr at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 22:19:47 2024
From: kcr at openjdk.org (Kevin Rushforth)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 22:19:47 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2278: Issuestitle Check shouldn't treat special character as
 leading lowercase letter [v3]
In-Reply-To: <hm6uDbkGjMJpBVYjKg6VhoF3kkym6oF54AiqfM0e6ps=.d744636c-7b93-4ae5-931e-09f91a67b396@github.com>
References: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
 <hm6uDbkGjMJpBVYjKg6VhoF3kkym6oF54AiqfM0e6ps=.d744636c-7b93-4ae5-931e-09f91a67b396@github.com>
Message-ID: <7qU4M-g3U5LpSOLOfjMKf-1rKcpzIAaaHV_V_pj0WdU=.2e841eef-b0d7-4871-bacf-0769ec7e2187@github.com>

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 21:08:10 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Currently, in IssuesTitleCheck::hasLeadingLowercaseLetter, the method checks if the leading character is uppercase, if so, it returns false. Otherwise, it will treat the character as lowercase. This is wrong because it treats special characters as lowercase letters. The solution is to make the method to check if the leading character is a lowercase letter.
>
> Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   review comment

Marked as reviewed by kcr (Reviewer).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656#pullrequestreview-2097480365

From erikj at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 23:54:07 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 23:54:07 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2278: Issuestitle Check shouldn't treat special character as
 leading lowercase letter [v3]
In-Reply-To: <hm6uDbkGjMJpBVYjKg6VhoF3kkym6oF54AiqfM0e6ps=.d744636c-7b93-4ae5-931e-09f91a67b396@github.com>
References: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
 <hm6uDbkGjMJpBVYjKg6VhoF3kkym6oF54AiqfM0e6ps=.d744636c-7b93-4ae5-931e-09f91a67b396@github.com>
Message-ID: <CHuaHv6K49iO_MYm9lEpG50GobuLv2n0vzXJ8yJtv0c=.dd238044-6b06-47e6-b2a3-f3cb7d5e7cdc@github.com>

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 21:08:10 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Currently, in IssuesTitleCheck::hasLeadingLowercaseLetter, the method checks if the leading character is uppercase, if so, it returns false. Otherwise, it will treat the character as lowercase. This is wrong because it treats special characters as lowercase letters. The solution is to make the method to check if the leading character is a lowercase letter.
>
> Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   review comment

Marked as reviewed by erikj (Lead).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656#pullrequestreview-2097595587

From erikj at openjdk.org  Tue Jun  4 23:54:07 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2024 23:54:07 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2278: Issuestitle Check shouldn't treat special character as
 leading lowercase letter [v2]
In-Reply-To: <5s0HZPBXotwkH340XwsVM1al2kG1Waq4BFxIvobVfNM=.e6d58a17-0566-4e2a-a11d-7b06c65b36ae@github.com>
References: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
 <Fu6Ko0Oo-B2oT6w8oNEdj5UR8RMykJzRZOmhvUM23Yo=.5baaecdd-1a43-4e34-9847-5a749282e078@github.com>
 <6SJHxQ4zzS0jirnt84IZp5e2nOrrnHEU11nZWjdub9g=.e150a4f2-4386-4bb7-ab28-22494d9f592d@github.com>
 <795gTbYJg6M_PWFjvlLYBSsBJ_k8V2p5wMoK3lO7rJQ=.140b2133-973b-4e8b-9432-0edc911887f5@github.com>
 <W2JyK76izA-ja056uKVOJ_bb8Sc901O9S1GKJw-rOAc=.e0de207d-5566-4e1d-be6b-0315728679d5@github.com>
 <b3E6WzsuOrzTywGT_gS9jPTmW9tA5ijDOzlk3nNlrL4=.d29ede09-f57f-4e06-aeb3-5961833b9a4a@github.com>
 <hDVB8lMmGjoDlkBtX7N-WUQbsrx4yGFs3_dRq5xqZHQ=.cef5eedf-8bfe-4154-bcbc-91d24e3caba1@github.com>
 <5s0HZPBXotwkH340XwsVM1al2kG1Waq4BFxIvobVfNM=.e6d58a17-0566-4e2a-a11d-7b06c65b36ae@github.com>
Message-ID: <wiHxTaXqM4f2F8Rn9aRWaxBM4LqNK2Qnai7xd5e-yCw=.2274bbc9-74e1-4fc2-aa15-02cb26c56fcf@github.com>

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 20:54:50 GMT, Kevin Rushforth <kcr at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> I think Erik was trying to use the non-capturing pattern `?:...`
>
> Ah, you may be right (in which case _that_ would be fine).

That was indeed what I was going for.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656#discussion_r1626756617

From zsong at openjdk.org  Wed Jun  5 17:23:36 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 17:23:36 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2278: Issuestitle Check shouldn't treat special character as
 leading lowercase letter [v3]
In-Reply-To: <hm6uDbkGjMJpBVYjKg6VhoF3kkym6oF54AiqfM0e6ps=.d744636c-7b93-4ae5-931e-09f91a67b396@github.com>
References: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
 <hm6uDbkGjMJpBVYjKg6VhoF3kkym6oF54AiqfM0e6ps=.d744636c-7b93-4ae5-931e-09f91a67b396@github.com>
Message-ID: <_CUthKfH1joSmddxv8xJ-DMpKZFUI9diob9RH6dDohc=.38358018-4309-42b3-ad48-5e97ec022898@github.com>

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 21:08:10 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Currently, in IssuesTitleCheck::hasLeadingLowercaseLetter, the method checks if the leading character is uppercase, if so, it returns false. Otherwise, it will treat the character as lowercase. This is wrong because it treats special characters as lowercase letters. The solution is to make the method to check if the leading character is a lowercase letter.
>
> Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   review comment

Thank you both for the review!

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656#issuecomment-2150577120

From zsong at openjdk.org  Wed Jun  5 17:23:36 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2024 17:23:36 GMT
Subject: Integrated: 2278: Issuestitle Check shouldn't treat special character
 as leading lowercase letter
In-Reply-To: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
References: <4w2vFqYkZ_TmbNOTuPha6E54bqEQMiBMwejT-BGOzRM=.e5c43359-d421-4165-b210-4aa8ba42b997@github.com>
Message-ID: <1UL3fY4jRTYjHrcnM65icha9oGVhGzzh2uD70GgYRjY=.52015560-682b-4539-8ea6-a4942733f515@github.com>

On Tue, 4 Jun 2024 17:09:46 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Currently, in IssuesTitleCheck::hasLeadingLowercaseLetter, the method checks if the leading character is uppercase, if so, it returns false. Otherwise, it will treat the character as lowercase. This is wrong because it treats special characters as lowercase letters. The solution is to make the method to check if the leading character is a lowercase letter.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 9d884b9e
Author:    Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/skara/commit/9d884b9e0c12e94341b7368314c77b289be4c0cf
Stats:     15 lines in 2 files changed: 0 ins; 9 del; 6 mod

2278: Issuestitle Check shouldn't treat special character as leading lowercase letter

Co-authored-by: Kevin Rushforth <kcr at openjdk.org>
Reviewed-by: kcr, erikj

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1656

From zsong at openjdk.org  Thu Jun  6 21:33:56 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2024 21:33:56 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2279: Improve JSONNumber::asInt usage to prevent future break
Message-ID: <ocEOqNLkuxj2aABho_vX4QBj9MtV4hmDvgXIHkN9UjQ=.8b6e5fb6-22a3-43c1-b78a-9b54912116ba@github.com>

[SKARA-2277](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2277) is an instance of a breakage caused by improper usage of JSONNumber::asInt. In our project, there are other usages of JSONNumber::asInt, we should clean them up to prevent future break.

As Erik said, he thinks it's fine to treat user ids and repository ids as int.

Here are the other 2 places that might break.

GitLabRepository::toCommitComment treats note ids as int.
GitHubPullRequest::reviews treats review ids as int.

Besides, I changed the type of id from int to String in Review.java

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

Commit messages:
 - update
 - SKARA-2279

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1657/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1657&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2279
  Stats: 25 lines in 6 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 25 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1657.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1657/head:pull/1657

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1657

From erikj at openjdk.org  Thu Jun  6 21:45:43 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 2024 21:45:43 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2279: Improve JSONNumber::asInt usage to prevent future break
In-Reply-To: <ocEOqNLkuxj2aABho_vX4QBj9MtV4hmDvgXIHkN9UjQ=.8b6e5fb6-22a3-43c1-b78a-9b54912116ba@github.com>
References: <ocEOqNLkuxj2aABho_vX4QBj9MtV4hmDvgXIHkN9UjQ=.8b6e5fb6-22a3-43c1-b78a-9b54912116ba@github.com>
Message-ID: <_4Zbib1q6R4_cHA-T5GtmqCeJJdGh1I-U-oL_GRAibY=.bc7a3807-fb70-439e-a5ad-5fca58183d26@github.com>

On Thu, 6 Jun 2024 21:24:09 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> [SKARA-2277](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2277) is an instance of a breakage caused by improper usage of JSONNumber::asInt. In our project, there are other usages of JSONNumber::asInt, we should clean them up to prevent future break.
> 
> As Erik said, he thinks it's fine to treat user ids and repository ids as int.
> 
> Here are the other 2 places that might break.
> 
> GitLabRepository::toCommitComment treats note ids as int.
> GitHubPullRequest::reviews treats review ids as int.
> 
> Besides, I changed the type of id from int to String in Review.java

Marked as reviewed by erikj (Lead).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1657#pullrequestreview-2103266465

From zsong at openjdk.org  Fri Jun  7 16:36:53 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:36:53 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2286: Git jcheck --working-tree/--staged not compatible with some
 checks
Message-ID: <qwuUxG4xwNOJ-IOCQDVy-n9ZUmWhLe_J7aCBz25EhAs=.a4033d83-9652-49c8-a484-6a60713fca5f@github.com>

In [SKARA-1690](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-1690), I tried to make jcheck cli able to run jcheck on the diff in current working tree. But seems like this feature is not compatible with some jchecks like problemLists check.

When jcheck is checking staged or working-tree, I think there is no point to run some checks that require real commit message. Therefore I disabled the checks and Skara CLI will print a prompt to user.

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

Commit messages:
 - update
 - update
 - SKARA-2286

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1658/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1658&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2286
  Stats: 16 lines in 3 files changed: 13 ins; 0 del; 3 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1658.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1658/head:pull/1658

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1658

From zsong at openjdk.org  Fri Jun  7 17:32:01 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:32:01 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2279: Improve JSONNumber::asInt usage to prevent future break
In-Reply-To: <ocEOqNLkuxj2aABho_vX4QBj9MtV4hmDvgXIHkN9UjQ=.8b6e5fb6-22a3-43c1-b78a-9b54912116ba@github.com>
References: <ocEOqNLkuxj2aABho_vX4QBj9MtV4hmDvgXIHkN9UjQ=.8b6e5fb6-22a3-43c1-b78a-9b54912116ba@github.com>
Message-ID: <ctEpOmHqJAjCClejoXhObtBKX4xn1o_SgqZrFcqWmr0=.bddbeaab-d931-45a9-a6c7-c98c9ab4f3e2@github.com>

On Thu, 6 Jun 2024 21:24:09 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> [SKARA-2277](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2277) is an instance of a breakage caused by improper usage of JSONNumber::asInt. In our project, there are other usages of JSONNumber::asInt, we should clean them up to prevent future break.
> 
> As Erik said, he thinks it's fine to treat user ids and repository ids as int.
> 
> Here are the other 2 places that might break.
> 
> GitLabRepository::toCommitComment treats note ids as int.
> GitHubPullRequest::reviews treats review ids as int.
> 
> Besides, I changed the type of id from int to String in Review.java

Thanks for the review!

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1657#issuecomment-2155246464

From zsong at openjdk.org  Fri Jun  7 17:32:01 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:32:01 GMT
Subject: Integrated: 2279: Improve JSONNumber::asInt usage to prevent future
 break
In-Reply-To: <ocEOqNLkuxj2aABho_vX4QBj9MtV4hmDvgXIHkN9UjQ=.8b6e5fb6-22a3-43c1-b78a-9b54912116ba@github.com>
References: <ocEOqNLkuxj2aABho_vX4QBj9MtV4hmDvgXIHkN9UjQ=.8b6e5fb6-22a3-43c1-b78a-9b54912116ba@github.com>
Message-ID: <qOxk6wSEJXx4ufUoYhm-kU57OPJXqyW9QRbvoOltzWY=.b5864476-933d-4940-bb83-b2228b1528c2@github.com>

On Thu, 6 Jun 2024 21:24:09 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> [SKARA-2277](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2277) is an instance of a breakage caused by improper usage of JSONNumber::asInt. In our project, there are other usages of JSONNumber::asInt, we should clean them up to prevent future break.
> 
> As Erik said, he thinks it's fine to treat user ids and repository ids as int.
> 
> Here are the other 2 places that might break.
> 
> GitLabRepository::toCommitComment treats note ids as int.
> GitHubPullRequest::reviews treats review ids as int.
> 
> Besides, I changed the type of id from int to String in Review.java

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 3f7de91f
Author:    Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/skara/commit/3f7de91f35ee79c32d79f2d57ac550152f710fc1
Stats:     25 lines in 6 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 25 mod

2279: Improve JSONNumber::asInt usage to prevent future break

Reviewed-by: erikj

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1657

From erikj at openjdk.org  Fri Jun  7 17:34:49 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:34:49 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2286: Git jcheck --working-tree/--staged not compatible with
 some checks
In-Reply-To: <qwuUxG4xwNOJ-IOCQDVy-n9ZUmWhLe_J7aCBz25EhAs=.a4033d83-9652-49c8-a484-6a60713fca5f@github.com>
References: <qwuUxG4xwNOJ-IOCQDVy-n9ZUmWhLe_J7aCBz25EhAs=.a4033d83-9652-49c8-a484-6a60713fca5f@github.com>
Message-ID: <-JT-9nohK3-E1ga29KpLtkRUQ1zzt_d3bC2Qr0fWQTs=.c9d80bd5-12e6-4402-ae4f-caf9da68f1ed@github.com>

On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:23:19 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> In [SKARA-1690](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-1690), I tried to make SKARA CLI able to run jcheck on the diff in current working tree. But seems like this feature is not compatible with some jchecks like problemLists check.
> 
> When jcheck is checking staged or working-tree, I think there is no point to run some checks that require real commit message. Therefore I disabled the checks and Skara CLI will print a prompt to user.

cli/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/cli/GitJCheck.java line 333:

> 331:             ranges.clear();
> 332:             ranges.add(WORKING_TREE_REV);
> 333:             System.out.println("When jcheck is running on working-tree, the following checks are not available: DuplicateIssuesCheck, IssuesCheck, IssuesTitleCheck, MergeMessageCheck, MessageCheck, ProblemListsCheck, ReviewersCheck.");

Instead of listing the checks that aren't available, I think we should list the checks that are and base that list on the actual list in JCheck.java. A manually created message like this will likely get outdated in the future.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1658#discussion_r1631508831

From zsong at openjdk.org  Fri Jun  7 17:49:30 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:49:30 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2286: Git jcheck --working-tree/--staged not compatible with
 some checks
In-Reply-To: <-JT-9nohK3-E1ga29KpLtkRUQ1zzt_d3bC2Qr0fWQTs=.c9d80bd5-12e6-4402-ae4f-caf9da68f1ed@github.com>
References: <qwuUxG4xwNOJ-IOCQDVy-n9ZUmWhLe_J7aCBz25EhAs=.a4033d83-9652-49c8-a484-6a60713fca5f@github.com>
 <-JT-9nohK3-E1ga29KpLtkRUQ1zzt_d3bC2Qr0fWQTs=.c9d80bd5-12e6-4402-ae4f-caf9da68f1ed@github.com>
Message-ID: <fiWpzh0h5iRHX2W7kNd5EM-KzxDeQbv61LuHlmrHKu8=.93a65753-35be-4a57-9bbe-1fc9ec1ff22a@github.com>

On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 17:32:39 GMT, Erik Joelsson <erikj at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> In [SKARA-1690](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-1690), I tried to make SKARA CLI able to run jcheck on the diff in current working tree. But seems like this feature is not compatible with some jchecks like problemLists check.
>> 
>> When jcheck is checking staged or working-tree, I think there is no point to run some checks that require real commit message. Therefore I disabled the checks and Skara CLI will print a prompt to user.
>
> cli/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/cli/GitJCheck.java line 333:
> 
>> 331:             ranges.clear();
>> 332:             ranges.add(WORKING_TREE_REV);
>> 333:             System.out.println("When jcheck is running on working-tree, the following checks are not available: DuplicateIssuesCheck, IssuesCheck, IssuesTitleCheck, MergeMessageCheck, MessageCheck, ProblemListsCheck, ReviewersCheck.");
> 
> Instead of listing the checks that aren't available, I think we should list the checks that are and base that list on the actual list in JCheck.java. A manually created message like this will likely get outdated in the future.

Right, will fix it. Thanks!

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1658#discussion_r1631522208

From zsong at openjdk.org  Fri Jun  7 18:08:55 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:08:55 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2286: Git jcheck --working-tree/--staged not compatible with
 some checks [v2]
In-Reply-To: <qwuUxG4xwNOJ-IOCQDVy-n9ZUmWhLe_J7aCBz25EhAs=.a4033d83-9652-49c8-a484-6a60713fca5f@github.com>
References: <qwuUxG4xwNOJ-IOCQDVy-n9ZUmWhLe_J7aCBz25EhAs=.a4033d83-9652-49c8-a484-6a60713fca5f@github.com>
Message-ID: <DyLtg1x4KoXZ4omYNQ_kzEo4Sb-G8yTkLqrmUk4YbgE=.08234343-7115-4656-9d96-53cf5ef5658f@github.com>

> In [SKARA-1690](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-1690), I tried to make SKARA CLI able to run jcheck on the diff in current working tree. But seems like this feature is not compatible with some jchecks like problemLists check.
> 
> When jcheck is checking staged or working-tree, I think there is no point to run some checks that require real commit message. Therefore I disabled the checks and Skara CLI will print a prompt to user.

Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  review comment

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1658/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1658/files/229e5a5d..da514368

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1658&range=01
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1658&range=00-01

  Stats: 26 lines in 2 files changed: 13 ins; 9 del; 4 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1658.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1658/head:pull/1658

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1658

From zsong at openjdk.org  Fri Jun  7 18:22:03 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:22:03 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2290: Update PullRequest::updateReview
Message-ID: <Dhrba3cvLX7kYk0TtRFBdq-Ui201lf4xJ0tTNEQx680=.50f366a3-45d3-4533-b026-924c7d61c5e0@github.com>

In [SKARA-2279](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2279), I changed the type of id from int to String in Review.java, but I didn't update the type of id in the interface of PullRequest::updateReview.

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

Commit messages:
 - SKARA-2290

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1659/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1659&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2290
  Stats: 5 lines in 5 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 5 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1659.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1659/head:pull/1659

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1659

From erikj at openjdk.org  Fri Jun  7 19:31:41 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:31:41 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2286: Git jcheck --working-tree/--staged not compatible with
 some checks [v2]
In-Reply-To: <DyLtg1x4KoXZ4omYNQ_kzEo4Sb-G8yTkLqrmUk4YbgE=.08234343-7115-4656-9d96-53cf5ef5658f@github.com>
References: <qwuUxG4xwNOJ-IOCQDVy-n9ZUmWhLe_J7aCBz25EhAs=.a4033d83-9652-49c8-a484-6a60713fca5f@github.com>
 <DyLtg1x4KoXZ4omYNQ_kzEo4Sb-G8yTkLqrmUk4YbgE=.08234343-7115-4656-9d96-53cf5ef5658f@github.com>
Message-ID: <fUyfeaOD7xntr_lcbKGpM2waC0n_oMBB1GhTVzB76L0=.16a99747-edce-4593-9a9e-272bffbdd70b@github.com>

On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:08:55 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> In [SKARA-1690](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-1690), I tried to make SKARA CLI able to run jcheck on the diff in current working tree. But seems like this feature is not compatible with some jchecks like problemLists check.
>> 
>> When jcheck is checking staged or working-tree, I think there is no point to run some checks that require real commit message. Therefore I disabled the checks and Skara CLI will print a prompt to user.
>
> Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   review comment

cli/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/cli/GitJCheck.java line 328:

> 326:             ranges.clear();
> 327:             ranges.add(STAGED_REV);
> 328:             System.out.println("When jcheck is running on staged, the following commit checks are available: " + JCheck.commitCheckNamesForStagedOrWorkingTree());

Suggestion:

            System.out.println("When jcheck is running on staged, only the following commit checks are available: " +
                    JCheck.commitCheckNamesForStagedOrWorkingTree());

cli/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/cli/GitJCheck.java line 333:

> 331:             ranges.clear();
> 332:             ranges.add(WORKING_TREE_REV);
> 333:             System.out.println("When jcheck is running on working-tree, the following commit checks are available: " + JCheck.commitCheckNamesForStagedOrWorkingTree());

Suggestion:

            System.out.println("When jcheck is running on working-tree, only the following commit checks are available: " +
                    JCheck.commitCheckNamesForStagedOrWorkingTree());

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1658#discussion_r1631611335
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1658#discussion_r1631611676

From erikj at openjdk.org  Fri Jun  7 19:32:39 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 19:32:39 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2290: Update PullRequest::updateReview
In-Reply-To: <Dhrba3cvLX7kYk0TtRFBdq-Ui201lf4xJ0tTNEQx680=.50f366a3-45d3-4533-b026-924c7d61c5e0@github.com>
References: <Dhrba3cvLX7kYk0TtRFBdq-Ui201lf4xJ0tTNEQx680=.50f366a3-45d3-4533-b026-924c7d61c5e0@github.com>
Message-ID: <-MCOnobeNjk8FrMpLVlI6kSsv7m4vK_waqewHCpKNsY=.87a7bddc-4094-4d53-bc9a-d84b6cd73969@github.com>

On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:17:22 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> In [SKARA-2279](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2279), I changed the type of id from int to String in Review.java, but I didn't update the type of id in the interface of PullRequest::updateReview.

Marked as reviewed by erikj (Lead).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1659#pullrequestreview-2105239928

From zsong at openjdk.org  Fri Jun  7 20:29:59 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:29:59 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2290: Update PullRequest::updateReview
In-Reply-To: <Dhrba3cvLX7kYk0TtRFBdq-Ui201lf4xJ0tTNEQx680=.50f366a3-45d3-4533-b026-924c7d61c5e0@github.com>
References: <Dhrba3cvLX7kYk0TtRFBdq-Ui201lf4xJ0tTNEQx680=.50f366a3-45d3-4533-b026-924c7d61c5e0@github.com>
Message-ID: <fRyEMMelIuP74s8u_x7k5AZyQVTglmGlkDaqxjImNzs=.f0585011-17c8-4a52-b6a3-039d20b479f7@github.com>

On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:17:22 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> In [SKARA-2279](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2279), I changed the type of id from int to String in Review.java, but I didn't update the type of id in the interface of PullRequest::updateReview.

Thanks for the review!

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1659#issuecomment-2155500682

From zsong at openjdk.org  Fri Jun  7 20:29:59 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:29:59 GMT
Subject: Integrated: 2290: Update PullRequest::updateReview
In-Reply-To: <Dhrba3cvLX7kYk0TtRFBdq-Ui201lf4xJ0tTNEQx680=.50f366a3-45d3-4533-b026-924c7d61c5e0@github.com>
References: <Dhrba3cvLX7kYk0TtRFBdq-Ui201lf4xJ0tTNEQx680=.50f366a3-45d3-4533-b026-924c7d61c5e0@github.com>
Message-ID: <PfaKFT2A7wRMcJfCb4OCv1y0BhBgX8ukot8YQlaa0Zo=.9ca8a50e-0f1f-442c-96d0-2aca9aa3124b@github.com>

On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 18:17:22 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> In [SKARA-2279](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2279), I changed the type of id from int to String in Review.java, but I didn't update the type of id in the interface of PullRequest::updateReview.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: c40e621f
Author:    Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/skara/commit/c40e621f27de28844fed9fa89c3cf909885a1922
Stats:     5 lines in 5 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 5 mod

2290: Update PullRequest::updateReview

Reviewed-by: erikj

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1659

From zsong at openjdk.org  Fri Jun  7 20:31:33 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:31:33 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2286: Git jcheck --working-tree/--staged not compatible with
 some checks [v3]
In-Reply-To: <qwuUxG4xwNOJ-IOCQDVy-n9ZUmWhLe_J7aCBz25EhAs=.a4033d83-9652-49c8-a484-6a60713fca5f@github.com>
References: <qwuUxG4xwNOJ-IOCQDVy-n9ZUmWhLe_J7aCBz25EhAs=.a4033d83-9652-49c8-a484-6a60713fca5f@github.com>
Message-ID: <xrenSj8arH9k9kbrzTElypnKbaF41w3gbf6_KZFTtJQ=.e48d13a8-a696-4ead-bf0c-36ccd5069b1d@github.com>

> In [SKARA-1690](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-1690), I tried to make SKARA CLI able to run jcheck on the diff in current working tree. But seems like this feature is not compatible with some jchecks like problemLists check.
> 
> When jcheck is checking staged or working-tree, I think there is no point to run some checks that require real commit message. Therefore I disabled the checks and Skara CLI will print a prompt to user.

Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional commits since the last revision:

 - Update cli/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/cli/GitJCheck.java
   
   Co-authored-by: Erik Joelsson <37597443+erikj79 at users.noreply.github.com>
 - Update cli/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/cli/GitJCheck.java
   
   Co-authored-by: Erik Joelsson <37597443+erikj79 at users.noreply.github.com>

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1658/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1658/files/da514368..169e2157

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1658&range=02
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1658&range=01-02

  Stats: 4 lines in 1 file changed: 2 ins; 0 del; 2 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1658.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1658/head:pull/1658

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1658

From erikj at openjdk.org  Fri Jun  7 21:09:51 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:09:51 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2286: Git jcheck --working-tree/--staged not compatible with
 some checks [v3]
In-Reply-To: <xrenSj8arH9k9kbrzTElypnKbaF41w3gbf6_KZFTtJQ=.e48d13a8-a696-4ead-bf0c-36ccd5069b1d@github.com>
References: <qwuUxG4xwNOJ-IOCQDVy-n9ZUmWhLe_J7aCBz25EhAs=.a4033d83-9652-49c8-a484-6a60713fca5f@github.com>
 <xrenSj8arH9k9kbrzTElypnKbaF41w3gbf6_KZFTtJQ=.e48d13a8-a696-4ead-bf0c-36ccd5069b1d@github.com>
Message-ID: <uJcw137fTKnZZ9zY8_hLkOCrJFBikyzHEc4u1w1GxjA=.24fa43aa-a0a3-44ee-9673-50e2d25602e7@github.com>

On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:31:33 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> In [SKARA-1690](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-1690), I tried to make SKARA CLI able to run jcheck on the diff in current working tree. But seems like this feature is not compatible with some jchecks like problemLists check.
>> 
>> When jcheck is checking staged or working-tree, I think there is no point to run some checks that require real commit message. Therefore I disabled the checks and Skara CLI will print a prompt to user.
>
> Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional commits since the last revision:
> 
>  - Update cli/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/cli/GitJCheck.java
>    
>    Co-authored-by: Erik Joelsson <37597443+erikj79 at users.noreply.github.com>
>  - Update cli/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/cli/GitJCheck.java
>    
>    Co-authored-by: Erik Joelsson <37597443+erikj79 at users.noreply.github.com>

Marked as reviewed by erikj (Lead).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1658#pullrequestreview-2105372400

From zsong at openjdk.org  Fri Jun  7 21:29:38 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:29:38 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2286: Git jcheck --working-tree/--staged not compatible with
 some checks [v3]
In-Reply-To: <xrenSj8arH9k9kbrzTElypnKbaF41w3gbf6_KZFTtJQ=.e48d13a8-a696-4ead-bf0c-36ccd5069b1d@github.com>
References: <qwuUxG4xwNOJ-IOCQDVy-n9ZUmWhLe_J7aCBz25EhAs=.a4033d83-9652-49c8-a484-6a60713fca5f@github.com>
 <xrenSj8arH9k9kbrzTElypnKbaF41w3gbf6_KZFTtJQ=.e48d13a8-a696-4ead-bf0c-36ccd5069b1d@github.com>
Message-ID: <YHrfjWLYXVyu04t2xsMRho8rb9qjfuQ_YdfVh7WH0OI=.e2f5607f-0078-4c2d-a17d-081a49bb58d2@github.com>

On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 20:31:33 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> In [SKARA-1690](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-1690), I tried to make SKARA CLI able to run jcheck on the diff in current working tree. But seems like this feature is not compatible with some jchecks like problemLists check.
>> 
>> When jcheck is checking staged or working-tree, I think there is no point to run some checks that require real commit message. Therefore I disabled the checks and Skara CLI will print a prompt to user.
>
> Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with two additional commits since the last revision:
> 
>  - Update cli/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/cli/GitJCheck.java
>    
>    Co-authored-by: Erik Joelsson <37597443+erikj79 at users.noreply.github.com>
>  - Update cli/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/cli/GitJCheck.java
>    
>    Co-authored-by: Erik Joelsson <37597443+erikj79 at users.noreply.github.com>

Thank you for the review!

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1658#issuecomment-2155583174

From zsong at openjdk.org  Fri Jun  7 21:29:38 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Fri, 7 Jun 2024 21:29:38 GMT
Subject: Integrated: 2286: Git jcheck --working-tree/--staged not compatible
 with some checks
In-Reply-To: <qwuUxG4xwNOJ-IOCQDVy-n9ZUmWhLe_J7aCBz25EhAs=.a4033d83-9652-49c8-a484-6a60713fca5f@github.com>
References: <qwuUxG4xwNOJ-IOCQDVy-n9ZUmWhLe_J7aCBz25EhAs=.a4033d83-9652-49c8-a484-6a60713fca5f@github.com>
Message-ID: <i2-ywAL84ELnIueAS3JIwpcwm_Kfl47X-wHgp_9PzcM=.fb4bda73-6a44-410a-aa12-aa04acdf6ddd@github.com>

On Fri, 7 Jun 2024 16:23:19 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> In [SKARA-1690](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-1690), I tried to make SKARA CLI able to run jcheck on the diff in current working tree. But seems like this feature is not compatible with some jchecks like problemLists check.
> 
> When jcheck is checking staged or working-tree, I think there is no point to run some checks that require real commit message. Therefore I disabled the checks and Skara CLI will print a prompt to user.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: c93a0d00
Author:    Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/skara/commit/c93a0d00578b36cb0239202855499913c28d257d
Stats:     23 lines in 3 files changed: 19 ins; 0 del; 4 mod

2286: Git jcheck --working-tree/--staged not compatible with some checks

Reviewed-by: erikj

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1658

From volker.simonis at gmail.com  Mon Jun 10 15:24:36 2024
From: volker.simonis at gmail.com (Volker Simonis)
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:24:36 +0200
Subject: Review and Commit links for backport branches
Message-ID: <CA+3eh109w7JD6zLaXjnv97YsO7vcZYd+bZEgoThzhAYHWJ9qYg@mail.gmail.com>

Hi,

After the JDK stabilization process has moved from using dedicated
repositories to using branches in the https://git.openjdk.org/jdk
repository, I noticed that Commit, Review and PullRequest links for
the master repository are now indistinguishable from the corresponding
downport links. E.g. from https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8333722:

Commit openjdk/jdk/5f9d3e3a
Commit openjdk/jdk/fdbc2b24

Review openjdk/jdk/19578
Review openjdk/jdk/19622

Previously, such links were easily distinguishable because they were
for different repositories.

I wonder if it would be possible to somehow add the branch name to the
link description, if it is not master, in order to make it more clear
what they refer to. E.g.

Commit openjdk/jdk/5f9d3e3a
Commit openjdk/jdk:23/fdbc2b24

Review openjdk/jdk/19578
Review openjdk/jdk:23/19622

Thank you and best regards,
Volker

From kevin.rushforth at oracle.com  Mon Jun 10 15:30:28 2024
From: kevin.rushforth at oracle.com (Kevin Rushforth)
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 08:30:28 -0700
Subject: Review and Commit links for backport branches
In-Reply-To: <CA+3eh109w7JD6zLaXjnv97YsO7vcZYd+bZEgoThzhAYHWJ9qYg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+3eh109w7JD6zLaXjnv97YsO7vcZYd+bZEgoThzhAYHWJ9qYg@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1e052d9e-38ff-4cbb-b09b-df3a90de124d@oracle.com>

This would just affect the link text in the issue links section, right? 
If we do this, I would just use the branch name, so "jdk23" not "23", 
but this seems like a reasonable Enhancement request to me, but Erik 
will need to weigh in on this.

-- Kevin


On 6/10/2024 8:24 AM, Volker Simonis wrote:
> Hi,
>
> After the JDK stabilization process has moved from using dedicated
> repositories to using branches in the https://git.openjdk.org/jdk
> repository, I noticed that Commit, Review and PullRequest links for
> the master repository are now indistinguishable from the corresponding
> downport links. E.g. from https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8333722:
>
> Commit openjdk/jdk/5f9d3e3a
> Commit openjdk/jdk/fdbc2b24
>
> Review openjdk/jdk/19578
> Review openjdk/jdk/19622
>
> Previously, such links were easily distinguishable because they were
> for different repositories.
>
> I wonder if it would be possible to somehow add the branch name to the
> link description, if it is not master, in order to make it more clear
> what they refer to. E.g.
>
> Commit openjdk/jdk/5f9d3e3a
> Commit openjdk/jdk:23/fdbc2b24
>
> Review openjdk/jdk/19578
> Review openjdk/jdk:23/19622
>
> Thank you and best regards,
> Volker


From volker.simonis at gmail.com  Mon Jun 10 15:43:57 2024
From: volker.simonis at gmail.com (Volker Simonis)
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:43:57 +0200
Subject: Review and Commit links for backport branches
In-Reply-To: <1e052d9e-38ff-4cbb-b09b-df3a90de124d@oracle.com>
References: <CA+3eh109w7JD6zLaXjnv97YsO7vcZYd+bZEgoThzhAYHWJ9qYg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1e052d9e-38ff-4cbb-b09b-df3a90de124d@oracle.com>
Message-ID: <CA+3eh10YNXfUR8370jQ9KrO-paGuv1mUiCy-JnSbUa7X4X+PTA@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 5:31?PM Kevin Rushforth
<kevin.rushforth at oracle.com> wrote:
>
> This would just affect the link text in the issue links section, right?
> If we do this, I would just use the branch name, so "jdk23" not "23",

Yes, just the text. We can't change the link, because that's for the
"jdk" repository in both cases.

Any syntax would be fine for me (jdk:23, jdk:jdk23 or jdk23) as long
as the version could easily be identified.

> but this seems like a reasonable Enhancement request to me, but Erik
> will need to weigh in on this.
>
> -- Kevin
>
>
> On 6/10/2024 8:24 AM, Volker Simonis wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > After the JDK stabilization process has moved from using dedicated
> > repositories to using branches in the https://git.openjdk.org/jdk
> > repository, I noticed that Commit, Review and PullRequest links for
> > the master repository are now indistinguishable from the corresponding
> > downport links. E.g. from https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8333722:
> >
> > Commit openjdk/jdk/5f9d3e3a
> > Commit openjdk/jdk/fdbc2b24
> >
> > Review openjdk/jdk/19578
> > Review openjdk/jdk/19622
> >
> > Previously, such links were easily distinguishable because they were
> > for different repositories.
> >
> > I wonder if it would be possible to somehow add the branch name to the
> > link description, if it is not master, in order to make it more clear
> > what they refer to. E.g.
> >
> > Commit openjdk/jdk/5f9d3e3a
> > Commit openjdk/jdk:23/fdbc2b24
> >
> > Review openjdk/jdk/19578
> > Review openjdk/jdk:23/19622
> >
> > Thank you and best regards,
> > Volker
>

From kevin.rushforth at oracle.com  Mon Jun 10 15:56:21 2024
From: kevin.rushforth at oracle.com (Kevin Rushforth)
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 08:56:21 -0700
Subject: [External] : Re: Review and Commit links for backport branches
In-Reply-To: <CA+3eh10YNXfUR8370jQ9KrO-paGuv1mUiCy-JnSbUa7X4X+PTA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CA+3eh109w7JD6zLaXjnv97YsO7vcZYd+bZEgoThzhAYHWJ9qYg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1e052d9e-38ff-4cbb-b09b-df3a90de124d@oracle.com>
 <CA+3eh10YNXfUR8370jQ9KrO-paGuv1mUiCy-JnSbUa7X4X+PTA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <6c11a7a7-8932-4d2c-9715-1213a539026b@oracle.com>

That sounds good then. Can you file a JBS Enhancement request in the 
SKARA project, "bot" component? Erik can then decide whether / how to 
proceed.

-- Kevin


On 6/10/2024 8:43 AM, Volker Simonis wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 5:31?PM Kevin Rushforth
> <kevin.rushforth at oracle.com> wrote:
>> This would just affect the link text in the issue links section, right?
>> If we do this, I would just use the branch name, so "jdk23" not "23",
> Yes, just the text. We can't change the link, because that's for the
> "jdk" repository in both cases.
>
> Any syntax would be fine for me (jdk:23, jdk:jdk23 or jdk23) as long
> as the version could easily be identified.
>
>> but this seems like a reasonable Enhancement request to me, but Erik
>> will need to weigh in on this.
>>
>> -- Kevin
>>
>>
>> On 6/10/2024 8:24 AM, Volker Simonis wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> After the JDK stabilization process has moved from using dedicated
>>> repositories to using branches in the https://git.openjdk.org/jdk
>>> repository, I noticed that Commit, Review and PullRequest links for
>>> the master repository are now indistinguishable from the corresponding
>>> downport links. E.g. from https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8333722:
>>>
>>> Commit openjdk/jdk/5f9d3e3a
>>> Commit openjdk/jdk/fdbc2b24
>>>
>>> Review openjdk/jdk/19578
>>> Review openjdk/jdk/19622
>>>
>>> Previously, such links were easily distinguishable because they were
>>> for different repositories.
>>>
>>> I wonder if it would be possible to somehow add the branch name to the
>>> link description, if it is not master, in order to make it more clear
>>> what they refer to. E.g.
>>>
>>> Commit openjdk/jdk/5f9d3e3a
>>> Commit openjdk/jdk:23/fdbc2b24
>>>
>>> Review openjdk/jdk/19578
>>> Review openjdk/jdk:23/19622
>>>
>>> Thank you and best regards,
>>> Volker


From volker.simonis at gmail.com  Mon Jun 10 16:32:19 2024
From: volker.simonis at gmail.com (Volker Simonis)
Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 18:32:19 +0200
Subject: [External] : Re: Review and Commit links for backport branches
In-Reply-To: <6c11a7a7-8932-4d2c-9715-1213a539026b@oracle.com>
References: <CA+3eh109w7JD6zLaXjnv97YsO7vcZYd+bZEgoThzhAYHWJ9qYg@mail.gmail.com>
 <1e052d9e-38ff-4cbb-b09b-df3a90de124d@oracle.com>
 <CA+3eh10YNXfUR8370jQ9KrO-paGuv1mUiCy-JnSbUa7X4X+PTA@mail.gmail.com>
 <6c11a7a7-8932-4d2c-9715-1213a539026b@oracle.com>
Message-ID: <CA+3eh1015QC772DdW7VWtCRp1rJAPPefngeOcQnP4R6tvauCgQ@mail.gmail.com>

Done: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2292

On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 5:57?PM Kevin Rushforth
<kevin.rushforth at oracle.com> wrote:
>
> That sounds good then. Can you file a JBS Enhancement request in the
> SKARA project, "bot" component? Erik can then decide whether / how to
> proceed.
>
> -- Kevin
>
>
> On 6/10/2024 8:43 AM, Volker Simonis wrote:
> > On Mon, Jun 10, 2024 at 5:31?PM Kevin Rushforth
> > <kevin.rushforth at oracle.com> wrote:
> >> This would just affect the link text in the issue links section, right?
> >> If we do this, I would just use the branch name, so "jdk23" not "23",
> > Yes, just the text. We can't change the link, because that's for the
> > "jdk" repository in both cases.
> >
> > Any syntax would be fine for me (jdk:23, jdk:jdk23 or jdk23) as long
> > as the version could easily be identified.
> >
> >> but this seems like a reasonable Enhancement request to me, but Erik
> >> will need to weigh in on this.
> >>
> >> -- Kevin
> >>
> >>
> >> On 6/10/2024 8:24 AM, Volker Simonis wrote:
> >>> Hi,
> >>>
> >>> After the JDK stabilization process has moved from using dedicated
> >>> repositories to using branches in the https://git.openjdk.org/jdk
> >>> repository, I noticed that Commit, Review and PullRequest links for
> >>> the master repository are now indistinguishable from the corresponding
> >>> downport links. E.g. from https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/JDK-8333722:
> >>>
> >>> Commit openjdk/jdk/5f9d3e3a
> >>> Commit openjdk/jdk/fdbc2b24
> >>>
> >>> Review openjdk/jdk/19578
> >>> Review openjdk/jdk/19622
> >>>
> >>> Previously, such links were easily distinguishable because they were
> >>> for different repositories.
> >>>
> >>> I wonder if it would be possible to somehow add the branch name to the
> >>> link description, if it is not master, in order to make it more clear
> >>> what they refer to. E.g.
> >>>
> >>> Commit openjdk/jdk/5f9d3e3a
> >>> Commit openjdk/jdk:23/fdbc2b24
> >>>
> >>> Review openjdk/jdk/19578
> >>> Review openjdk/jdk:23/19622
> >>>
> >>> Thank you and best regards,
> >>> Volker
>

From zsong at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 14 18:01:54 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 18:01:54 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2295: Rephrase error messages in PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor
Message-ID: <oPLEFM3oTCTOE0LZOr6xCx-9C0hUfRWiTYxkpyDIjPM=.95911a76-39b2-4650-a461-b78ae061fd2a@github.com>

PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor is responsible for generating error messages when jcheck fails. Currently, jcheck could be configured as different severity(error or warning). However, when generating error messages for some jchecks like binary check, the error message would be like "Binary files are not allowed", so if the binary check was configured as warning, this message seems too hard. Therefore, I would like to rephrase some error messages.

Erik suggested that we should generate different messages depending on the severity, but I think maybe it's unnecessary. The user does not need to judge the severity depending on the error message. The user only needs to check which section is the message under(Integration Blocker or Warning).

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

Commit messages:
 - fix test
 - update
 - SKARA-2295

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1660/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1660&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2295
  Stats: 5 lines in 2 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 5 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1660.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1660/head:pull/1660

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1660

From erikj at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 14 18:34:35 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 18:34:35 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2295: Rephrase error messages in PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor
In-Reply-To: <oPLEFM3oTCTOE0LZOr6xCx-9C0hUfRWiTYxkpyDIjPM=.95911a76-39b2-4650-a461-b78ae061fd2a@github.com>
References: <oPLEFM3oTCTOE0LZOr6xCx-9C0hUfRWiTYxkpyDIjPM=.95911a76-39b2-4650-a461-b78ae061fd2a@github.com>
Message-ID: <FhgxgHfGf49sPVjKfzI2_VNCGQFNRqYi_so_eOKOjJ4=.4bd5cd63-94be-4416-9b2f-8671fa562cc0@github.com>

On Thu, 13 Jun 2024 23:15:15 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor is responsible for generating error messages when jcheck fails. Currently, jcheck could be configured as different severity(error or warning). However, when generating error messages for some jchecks like binary check, the error message would be like "Binary files are not allowed", so if the binary check was configured as warning, this message seems too hard. Therefore, I would like to rephrase some error messages.
> 
> Erik suggested that we should generate different messages depending on the severity, but I think maybe it's unnecessary. The user does not need to judge the severity depending on the error message. The user only needs to check which section is the message under(Integration Blocker or Warning).

I meant that each visit method needs to check the severity and print the appropriate error message for the severity.

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1660#pullrequestreview-2119021669

From zsong at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 14 18:38:01 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 18:38:01 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2295: Rephrase error messages in PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor
In-Reply-To: <FhgxgHfGf49sPVjKfzI2_VNCGQFNRqYi_so_eOKOjJ4=.4bd5cd63-94be-4416-9b2f-8671fa562cc0@github.com>
References: <oPLEFM3oTCTOE0LZOr6xCx-9C0hUfRWiTYxkpyDIjPM=.95911a76-39b2-4650-a461-b78ae061fd2a@github.com>
 <FhgxgHfGf49sPVjKfzI2_VNCGQFNRqYi_so_eOKOjJ4=.4bd5cd63-94be-4416-9b2f-8671fa562cc0@github.com>
Message-ID: <KQaNVdhvKLMVUVTBcp6YPWg7pg9fobSns2iVrl3EPuo=.36ba2599-be1e-490f-9c39-be92c14d3ccd@github.com>

On Fri, 14 Jun 2024 18:32:24 GMT, Erik Joelsson <erikj at openjdk.org> wrote:

> I meant that each visit method needs to check the severity and print the appropriate error message for the severity.

Yes, but as I said in the PR body, maybe it's too complicated? Or you think it's necessary...

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1660#issuecomment-2168563157

From erikj at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 14 19:52:46 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 19:52:46 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2295: Rephrase error messages in PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor
In-Reply-To: <KQaNVdhvKLMVUVTBcp6YPWg7pg9fobSns2iVrl3EPuo=.36ba2599-be1e-490f-9c39-be92c14d3ccd@github.com>
References: <oPLEFM3oTCTOE0LZOr6xCx-9C0hUfRWiTYxkpyDIjPM=.95911a76-39b2-4650-a461-b78ae061fd2a@github.com>
 <FhgxgHfGf49sPVjKfzI2_VNCGQFNRqYi_so_eOKOjJ4=.4bd5cd63-94be-4416-9b2f-8671fa562cc0@github.com>
 <KQaNVdhvKLMVUVTBcp6YPWg7pg9fobSns2iVrl3EPuo=.36ba2599-be1e-490f-9c39-be92c14d3ccd@github.com>
Message-ID: <sLhmdsK8jVViqfhXMCROFnhUiYbUMB5BSlzjs5N2vZo=.292f70e1-fd22-451c-aff6-82eafbcdd87a@github.com>

On Fri, 14 Jun 2024 18:35:51 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Yes, but as I said in the PR body, maybe it's too complicated? Or you think it's necessary...

Sorry, I didn't read that part fully until now. You have a point, but after having thought about this for a bit I still think it would be better to write separate messages. If it's an error it needs to be clear that it's an error.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1660#issuecomment-2168663088

From erikj at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 14 19:52:46 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 19:52:46 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2295: Rephrase error messages in PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor
In-Reply-To: <oPLEFM3oTCTOE0LZOr6xCx-9C0hUfRWiTYxkpyDIjPM=.95911a76-39b2-4650-a461-b78ae061fd2a@github.com>
References: <oPLEFM3oTCTOE0LZOr6xCx-9C0hUfRWiTYxkpyDIjPM=.95911a76-39b2-4650-a461-b78ae061fd2a@github.com>
Message-ID: <XV8iH-WwTBRqocMlsG6Fya8YsPUBnP9w21TZp2Maw84=.5d6a659d-8217-40da-b407-a61a3415a41c@github.com>

On Thu, 13 Jun 2024 23:15:15 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor is responsible for generating error messages when jcheck fails. Currently, jcheck could be configured as different severity(error or warning). However, when generating error messages for some jchecks like binary check, the error message would be like "Binary files are not allowed", so if the binary check was configured as warning, this message seems too hard. Therefore, I would like to rephrase some error messages.
> 
> Erik suggested that we should generate different messages depending on the severity, but I think maybe it's unnecessary. The user does not need to judge the severity depending on the error message. The user only needs to check which section is the message under(Integration Blocker or Warning).

bots/pr/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor.java line 283:

> 281:     @Override
> 282:     public void visit(ExecutableIssue issue) {
> 283:         addMessage(issue.check(), String.format("Patch contains an executable file (file: %s)", issue.path()), issue.severity());

I think for the warning variant, leave out the "file:" part since the sentence is already ending with "file". It looks a bit weird repeating the word.

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

PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1660#discussion_r1640276692

From zsong at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 14 21:25:55 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 21:25:55 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2295: Rephrase error messages in PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor
 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <oPLEFM3oTCTOE0LZOr6xCx-9C0hUfRWiTYxkpyDIjPM=.95911a76-39b2-4650-a461-b78ae061fd2a@github.com>
References: <oPLEFM3oTCTOE0LZOr6xCx-9C0hUfRWiTYxkpyDIjPM=.95911a76-39b2-4650-a461-b78ae061fd2a@github.com>
Message-ID: <eLBbGnEQv7Gfx2PVuGrZF8e5hFNmcOpi7i5ShabmOhk=.b622a2c7-dd91-4cd2-86b0-0f0d601642ed@github.com>

> PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor is responsible for generating error messages when jcheck fails. Currently, jcheck could be configured as different severity(error or warning). However, when generating error messages for some jchecks like binary check, the error message would be like "Binary files are not allowed", so if the binary check was configured as warning, this message seems too hard. Therefore, I would like to rephrase some error messages.
> 
> Erik suggested that we should generate different messages depending on the severity, but I think maybe it's unnecessary. The user does not need to judge the severity depending on the error message. The user only needs to check which section is the message under(Integration Blocker or Warning).

Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  review comment

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1660/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1660/files/0458d2b3..7218b75a

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1660&range=01
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1660&range=00-01

  Stats: 23 lines in 2 files changed: 11 ins; 0 del; 12 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1660.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1660/head:pull/1660

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1660

From erikj at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 14 21:43:20 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 21:43:20 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2295: Rephrase error messages in PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor
 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <eLBbGnEQv7Gfx2PVuGrZF8e5hFNmcOpi7i5ShabmOhk=.b622a2c7-dd91-4cd2-86b0-0f0d601642ed@github.com>
References: <oPLEFM3oTCTOE0LZOr6xCx-9C0hUfRWiTYxkpyDIjPM=.95911a76-39b2-4650-a461-b78ae061fd2a@github.com>
 <eLBbGnEQv7Gfx2PVuGrZF8e5hFNmcOpi7i5ShabmOhk=.b622a2c7-dd91-4cd2-86b0-0f0d601642ed@github.com>
Message-ID: <mr0WXQbCpnpx77C7ZQaLHmFWRSUvPYM0cRLy_Cw85y8=.e08b7b91-d9cf-4d74-af80-1ad5140a75eb@github.com>

On Fri, 14 Jun 2024 21:25:55 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor is responsible for generating error messages when jcheck fails. Currently, jcheck could be configured as different severity(error or warning). However, when generating error messages for some jchecks like binary check, the error message would be like "Binary files are not allowed", so if the binary check was configured as warning, this message seems too hard. Therefore, I would like to rephrase some error messages.
>> 
>> Erik suggested that we should generate different messages depending on the severity, but I think maybe it's unnecessary. The user does not need to judge the severity depending on the error message. The user only needs to check which section is the message under(Integration Blocker or Warning).
>
> Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   review comment

Nice, I like these more nuanced messages.

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

Marked as reviewed by erikj (Lead).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1660#pullrequestreview-2119369767

From zsong at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 14 21:54:00 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 21:54:00 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2295: Rephrase error messages in PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor
 [v2]
In-Reply-To: <eLBbGnEQv7Gfx2PVuGrZF8e5hFNmcOpi7i5ShabmOhk=.b622a2c7-dd91-4cd2-86b0-0f0d601642ed@github.com>
References: <oPLEFM3oTCTOE0LZOr6xCx-9C0hUfRWiTYxkpyDIjPM=.95911a76-39b2-4650-a461-b78ae061fd2a@github.com>
 <eLBbGnEQv7Gfx2PVuGrZF8e5hFNmcOpi7i5ShabmOhk=.b622a2c7-dd91-4cd2-86b0-0f0d601642ed@github.com>
Message-ID: <hi93qqK-h0SgwWeYkbanafKv3TthKppvd9sL8UNw3U8=.64720b44-dfe3-4b9a-b0ba-bd64a37b1d41@github.com>

On Fri, 14 Jun 2024 21:25:55 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor is responsible for generating error messages when jcheck fails. Currently, jcheck could be configured as different severity(error or warning). However, when generating error messages for some jchecks like binary check, the error message would be like "Binary files are not allowed", so if the binary check was configured as warning, this message seems too hard. Therefore, I would like to rephrase some error messages.
>> 
>> Erik suggested that we should generate different messages depending on the severity, but I think maybe it's unnecessary. The user does not need to judge the severity depending on the error message. The user only needs to check which section is the message under(Integration Blocker or Warning).
>
> Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   review comment

Thanks for the review!

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1660#issuecomment-2168808416

From zsong at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 14 21:54:01 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Fri, 14 Jun 2024 21:54:01 GMT
Subject: Integrated: 2295: Rephrase error messages in
 PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor
In-Reply-To: <oPLEFM3oTCTOE0LZOr6xCx-9C0hUfRWiTYxkpyDIjPM=.95911a76-39b2-4650-a461-b78ae061fd2a@github.com>
References: <oPLEFM3oTCTOE0LZOr6xCx-9C0hUfRWiTYxkpyDIjPM=.95911a76-39b2-4650-a461-b78ae061fd2a@github.com>
Message-ID: <-SAeBrSlN8VfcJLC1S_xY_xVANCMYKyW-bz3JeJgqEE=.8bd84a7a-48c4-4d8d-98b3-521e4afdbc9b@github.com>

On Thu, 13 Jun 2024 23:15:15 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor is responsible for generating error messages when jcheck fails. Currently, jcheck could be configured as different severity(error or warning). However, when generating error messages for some jchecks like binary check, the error message would be like "Binary files are not allowed", so if the binary check was configured as warning, this message seems too hard. Therefore, I would like to rephrase some error messages.
> 
> Erik suggested that we should generate different messages depending on the severity, but I think maybe it's unnecessary. The user does not need to judge the severity depending on the error message. The user only needs to check which section is the message under(Integration Blocker or Warning).

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 19a83f28
Author:    Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/skara/commit/19a83f283f7434cf000d13ad419e89fc55f2a9fa
Stats:     21 lines in 1 file changed: 11 ins; 0 del; 10 mod

2295: Rephrase error messages in PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor

Reviewed-by: erikj

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1660

From zsong at openjdk.org  Thu Jun 20 18:34:13 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Thu, 20 Jun 2024 18:34:13 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2297: CSRs for OpenJDK 8u backports not being picked up
Message-ID: <CjL8Y_scgLqmGSOtxrUlYmBfi9gci86CQdnRvsn4siQ=.5923ece9-5268-44f5-85bf-1482e134ac46@github.com>

Currently, the version matching logic in `Backports::findClosetIssue` and `Backports::findIssue` differs, causing the skara bot fail to find CSRs for some issues.

In this patch, I'm trying to unify the version matching logic between the two methods. I couldn't find a good way to reuse the previous methods(`Backports::matchVersion`, `Backports::matchOptPoolVersion`, `Backports::matchPoolVersion`, `Backports::matchScratchVersion`), so I changed the interface of the methods.

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

Commit messages:
 - update comment
 - SKARA-2297

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1661/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1661&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2297
  Stats: 59 lines in 2 files changed: 5 ins; 23 del; 31 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1661.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1661/head:pull/1661

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1661

From erikj at openjdk.org  Mon Jun 24 09:25:26 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2024 09:25:26 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2297: CSRs for OpenJDK 8u backports not being picked up
In-Reply-To: <CjL8Y_scgLqmGSOtxrUlYmBfi9gci86CQdnRvsn4siQ=.5923ece9-5268-44f5-85bf-1482e134ac46@github.com>
References: <CjL8Y_scgLqmGSOtxrUlYmBfi9gci86CQdnRvsn4siQ=.5923ece9-5268-44f5-85bf-1482e134ac46@github.com>
Message-ID: <a_vlS7PCsngju66v7Py_oDCKAmpkD7hefsg-Gktv04s=.e9d2f3d0-a40d-4c3d-ac24-473944048f7c@github.com>

On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 18:00:02 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Currently, the version matching logic in `Backports::findClosetIssue` and `Backports::findIssue` differs, causing the skara bot fail to find CSRs for some issues.
> 
> In this patch, I'm trying to unify the version matching logic between the two methods. I couldn't find a good way to reuse the previous methods(`Backports::matchVersion`, `Backports::matchOptPoolVersion`, `Backports::matchPoolVersion`, `Backports::matchScratchVersion`), so I changed the interface of the methods.

Marked as reviewed by erikj (Lead).

jbs/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/jbs/Backports.java line 172:

> 170:                 .filter(Backports::isNonScratchVersion)
> 171:                 .toList();
> 172:         return nonScratch.size() == 0;

Maybe use `noneMatch`?

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1661#pullrequestreview-2135157685
PR Review Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1661#discussion_r1650655125

From zsong at openjdk.org  Mon Jun 24 17:07:29 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2024 17:07:29 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2297: CSRs for OpenJDK 8u backports not being picked up [v2]
In-Reply-To: <CjL8Y_scgLqmGSOtxrUlYmBfi9gci86CQdnRvsn4siQ=.5923ece9-5268-44f5-85bf-1482e134ac46@github.com>
References: <CjL8Y_scgLqmGSOtxrUlYmBfi9gci86CQdnRvsn4siQ=.5923ece9-5268-44f5-85bf-1482e134ac46@github.com>
Message-ID: <uX9XXA0zk6kOqN8DOnYAYehgBnyS-ZarDZQNEM7N9tU=.4132ebec-15cc-4e16-b175-0f526ff3d641@github.com>

> Currently, the version matching logic in `Backports::findClosetIssue` and `Backports::findIssue` differs, causing the skara bot fail to find CSRs for some issues.
> 
> In this patch, I'm trying to unify the version matching logic between the two methods. I couldn't find a good way to reuse the previous methods(`Backports::matchVersion`, `Backports::matchOptPoolVersion`, `Backports::matchPoolVersion`, `Backports::matchScratchVersion`), so I changed the interface of the methods.

Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  review comment

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1661/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1661/files/8f323b68..2e4ef8cf

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1661&range=01
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1661&range=00-01

  Stats: 4 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 2 del; 2 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1661.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1661/head:pull/1661

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1661

From zsong at openjdk.org  Mon Jun 24 19:46:33 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2024 19:46:33 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2297: CSRs for OpenJDK 8u backports not being picked up [v2]
In-Reply-To: <uX9XXA0zk6kOqN8DOnYAYehgBnyS-ZarDZQNEM7N9tU=.4132ebec-15cc-4e16-b175-0f526ff3d641@github.com>
References: <CjL8Y_scgLqmGSOtxrUlYmBfi9gci86CQdnRvsn4siQ=.5923ece9-5268-44f5-85bf-1482e134ac46@github.com>
 <uX9XXA0zk6kOqN8DOnYAYehgBnyS-ZarDZQNEM7N9tU=.4132ebec-15cc-4e16-b175-0f526ff3d641@github.com>
Message-ID: <Uhl-WuFLZ72mLETRRqt0bMXkQI7-q01NnDTZkfi2rAM=.05498cff-9550-48d2-bbd2-aee2939ce12b@github.com>

On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 17:07:29 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Currently, the version matching logic in `Backports::findClosetIssue` and `Backports::findIssue` differs, causing the skara bot fail to find CSRs for some issues.
>> 
>> In this patch, I'm trying to unify the version matching logic between the two methods. I couldn't find a good way to reuse the previous methods(`Backports::matchVersion`, `Backports::matchOptPoolVersion`, `Backports::matchPoolVersion`, `Backports::matchScratchVersion`), so I changed the interface of the methods.
>
> Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   review comment

Thanks for the review!

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1661#issuecomment-2187282500

From zsong at openjdk.org  Mon Jun 24 19:46:33 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Mon, 24 Jun 2024 19:46:33 GMT
Subject: Integrated: 2297: CSRs for OpenJDK 8u backports not being picked up
In-Reply-To: <CjL8Y_scgLqmGSOtxrUlYmBfi9gci86CQdnRvsn4siQ=.5923ece9-5268-44f5-85bf-1482e134ac46@github.com>
References: <CjL8Y_scgLqmGSOtxrUlYmBfi9gci86CQdnRvsn4siQ=.5923ece9-5268-44f5-85bf-1482e134ac46@github.com>
Message-ID: <tqCVfaLUPvZKglrnqi_wKYVYoENFK58_K9zK9JMODPo=.2fa6065e-7af2-44dd-ab5f-12f2e310fe6a@github.com>

On Thu, 20 Jun 2024 18:00:02 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Currently, the version matching logic in `Backports::findClosetIssue` and `Backports::findIssue` differs, causing the skara bot fail to find CSRs for some issues.
> 
> In this patch, I'm trying to unify the version matching logic between the two methods. I couldn't find a good way to reuse the previous methods(`Backports::matchVersion`, `Backports::matchOptPoolVersion`, `Backports::matchPoolVersion`, `Backports::matchScratchVersion`), so I changed the interface of the methods.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 2e662961
Author:    Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/skara/commit/2e6629612be49741d34d4287be7fccbb0058885b
Stats:     60 lines in 2 files changed: 5 ins; 25 del; 30 mod

2297: CSRs for OpenJDK 8u backports not being picked up

Reviewed-by: erikj

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1661

From zsong at openjdk.org  Tue Jun 25 00:27:52 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 00:27:52 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2307: PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor generates only one error
 message per Issue type
Message-ID: <uuBlgY8Jo6nzNl7FZ-4m94i0-7Dj5MCD04ho0KqEOSg=.8d655de8-7e35-47a4-a7e3-9680f33e255e@github.com>

When testing [SKARA-2303](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2303), I found that even when there are few binary files in a diff, the pr body only warns about one binary file. Then I found that in PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor, we are using HashMap<Check, String> to store the error messages, so if there are few issues with the same type, the HashMap is only able to save the last error message.

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

Commit messages:
 - SKARA-2307

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1662/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1662&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2307
  Stats: 26 lines in 2 files changed: 8 ins; 0 del; 18 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1662.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1662/head:pull/1662

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1662

From erikj at openjdk.org  Tue Jun 25 07:05:20 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 07:05:20 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2307: PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor generates only one error
 message per Issue type
In-Reply-To: <uuBlgY8Jo6nzNl7FZ-4m94i0-7Dj5MCD04ho0KqEOSg=.8d655de8-7e35-47a4-a7e3-9680f33e255e@github.com>
References: <uuBlgY8Jo6nzNl7FZ-4m94i0-7Dj5MCD04ho0KqEOSg=.8d655de8-7e35-47a4-a7e3-9680f33e255e@github.com>
Message-ID: <wcWa4YToK9SB2FSSuVqIE3NW8scR72pZKhWtmJGfWsk=.2e33bf42-5f9a-4d23-a8db-5089e60415e4@github.com>

On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 22:31:58 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> When testing [SKARA-2303](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2303), I found that even when there are few binary files in a diff, the pr body only warns about one binary file. Then I found that in PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor, we are using HashMap<Check, String> to store the error messages, so if there are few issues with the same type, the HashMap is only able to save the last error message.

I wonder if this was done on purpose to limit the number of issues listed. 

Is there a limitation on the number of errors shown in the presentation layer? 

Do all checks produce unique messages (like which file has the problem) for each instance? If not, then having multiple instances with the same message isn't going to be very helpful.

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1662#pullrequestreview-2137550610

From zsong at openjdk.org  Tue Jun 25 16:47:37 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 16:47:37 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2307: PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor generates only one error
 message per Issue type
In-Reply-To: <wcWa4YToK9SB2FSSuVqIE3NW8scR72pZKhWtmJGfWsk=.2e33bf42-5f9a-4d23-a8db-5089e60415e4@github.com>
References: <uuBlgY8Jo6nzNl7FZ-4m94i0-7Dj5MCD04ho0KqEOSg=.8d655de8-7e35-47a4-a7e3-9680f33e255e@github.com>
 <wcWa4YToK9SB2FSSuVqIE3NW8scR72pZKhWtmJGfWsk=.2e33bf42-5f9a-4d23-a8db-5089e60415e4@github.com>
Message-ID: <COmCc-KwdY_zJ1TNtyMpJd0c5dHjJH_BlopNjUz8oLk=.62d46886-48ce-419f-9ac8-4720969f5f22@github.com>

On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 07:03:13 GMT, Erik Joelsson <erikj at openjdk.org> wrote:

> I wonder if this was done on purpose to limit the number of issues listed.

Maybe not intended since this behavior is only in PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor. In JCheckCLIVisitor, it will print all the messages.

> Is there a limitation on the number of errors shown in the presentation layer?

No.

> Do all checks produce unique messages (like which file has the problem) for each instance? If not, then having multiple instances with the same message isn't going to be very helpful.

Yes, all checks will generate unique messages otherwise it will only generate one issue.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1662#issuecomment-2189443593

From erikj at openjdk.org  Tue Jun 25 17:37:46 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 17:37:46 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2307: PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor generates only one error
 message per Issue type
In-Reply-To: <COmCc-KwdY_zJ1TNtyMpJd0c5dHjJH_BlopNjUz8oLk=.62d46886-48ce-419f-9ac8-4720969f5f22@github.com>
References: <uuBlgY8Jo6nzNl7FZ-4m94i0-7Dj5MCD04ho0KqEOSg=.8d655de8-7e35-47a4-a7e3-9680f33e255e@github.com>
 <wcWa4YToK9SB2FSSuVqIE3NW8scR72pZKhWtmJGfWsk=.2e33bf42-5f9a-4d23-a8db-5089e60415e4@github.com>
 <COmCc-KwdY_zJ1TNtyMpJd0c5dHjJH_BlopNjUz8oLk=.62d46886-48ce-419f-9ac8-4720969f5f22@github.com>
Message-ID: <0kOfWe6KGiOlorq5wNZbjweJTeSwgt1Ha2QQ529iEYg=.bb5ff843-0299-4a88-b4c7-e3020d1e8ba5@github.com>

On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 16:45:19 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Is there a limitation on the number of errors shown in the presentation layer?

> No.

The previous implementation did provide an implicit limitation to the number of errors/warnings printed. I think we should add a new explicit limit if we fix this. Something like max 50 or so to avoid flooding the PR body with it.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1662#issuecomment-2189565050

From zsong at openjdk.org  Tue Jun 25 19:47:03 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 19:47:03 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2307: PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor generates only one error
 message per Issue type
In-Reply-To: <0kOfWe6KGiOlorq5wNZbjweJTeSwgt1Ha2QQ529iEYg=.bb5ff843-0299-4a88-b4c7-e3020d1e8ba5@github.com>
References: <uuBlgY8Jo6nzNl7FZ-4m94i0-7Dj5MCD04ho0KqEOSg=.8d655de8-7e35-47a4-a7e3-9680f33e255e@github.com>
 <wcWa4YToK9SB2FSSuVqIE3NW8scR72pZKhWtmJGfWsk=.2e33bf42-5f9a-4d23-a8db-5089e60415e4@github.com>
 <COmCc-KwdY_zJ1TNtyMpJd0c5dHjJH_BlopNjUz8oLk=.62d46886-48ce-419f-9ac8-4720969f5f22@github.com>
 <0kOfWe6KGiOlorq5wNZbjweJTeSwgt1Ha2QQ529iEYg=.bb5ff843-0299-4a88-b4c7-e3020d1e8ba5@github.com>
Message-ID: <Y00ZjRLPH7U8SOdgKQKwnqhJeMnm4je_Q9DbmJlagrg=.0aaf5276-252c-4ebf-b7fe-4515fed524eb@github.com>

On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 17:35:13 GMT, Erik Joelsson <erikj at openjdk.org> wrote:

> > > Is there a limitation on the number of errors shown in the presentation layer?
> 
> > No.
> 
> The previous implementation did provide an implicit limitation to the number of errors/warnings printed. I think we should add a new explicit limit if we fix this. Something like max 50 or so to avoid flooding the PR body with it.

Okay, 50 for all checks or 50 for each check?

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1662#issuecomment-2189841830

From erikj at openjdk.org  Tue Jun 25 20:28:41 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 20:28:41 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2307: PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor generates only one error
 message per Issue type
In-Reply-To: <uuBlgY8Jo6nzNl7FZ-4m94i0-7Dj5MCD04ho0KqEOSg=.8d655de8-7e35-47a4-a7e3-9680f33e255e@github.com>
References: <uuBlgY8Jo6nzNl7FZ-4m94i0-7Dj5MCD04ho0KqEOSg=.8d655de8-7e35-47a4-a7e3-9680f33e255e@github.com>
Message-ID: <YKrJXRDthgyCm6yUkytPjlpmwM_YC1gcJ7-JMDBM_jE=.a8349b5c-a9e9-493d-a2c5-bf0d8374cf51@github.com>

On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 22:31:58 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> When testing [SKARA-2303](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2303), I found that even when there are few binary files in a diff, the pr body only warns about one binary file. Then I found that in PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor, we are using HashMap<Check, String> to store the error messages, so if there are few issues with the same type, the HashMap is only able to save the last error message.

I meant 50 total.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1662#issuecomment-2189908557

From zsong at openjdk.org  Tue Jun 25 22:16:35 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 22:16:35 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2307: PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor generates only one error
 message per Issue type [v2]
In-Reply-To: <uuBlgY8Jo6nzNl7FZ-4m94i0-7Dj5MCD04ho0KqEOSg=.8d655de8-7e35-47a4-a7e3-9680f33e255e@github.com>
References: <uuBlgY8Jo6nzNl7FZ-4m94i0-7Dj5MCD04ho0KqEOSg=.8d655de8-7e35-47a4-a7e3-9680f33e255e@github.com>
Message-ID: <mYD4kB8aKM6YLjvOwJyZQKl4VMWR8kdj1p3WdUMPl1M=.dd3be3bf-0fc2-44b8-a4f0-590c78691cb8@github.com>

> When testing [SKARA-2303](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2303), I found that even when there are few binary files in a diff, the pr body only warns about one binary file. Then I found that in PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor, we are using HashMap<Check, String> to store the error messages, so if there are few issues with the same type, the HashMap is only able to save the last error message.

Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  set limit for error messages

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1662/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1662/files/c50dc783..53fd8a14

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1662&range=01
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1662&range=00-01

  Stats: 10 lines in 1 file changed: 6 ins; 0 del; 4 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1662.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1662/head:pull/1662

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1662

From zsong at openjdk.org  Tue Jun 25 23:43:58 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 23:43:58 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2302: Notify when PR is ready for sponsor
Message-ID: <pviyWCytGghFNEXHrk_bB8Z6JDp6F4cWhrm8ra2XnU4=.55b94128-bb13-42f2-9a88-f9d74005eb23@github.com>

This patch is trying to make skara bot be able to send an email notification about the "pr is ready for sponsor" comment.

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

Commit messages:
 - SKARA-2302

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1663/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1663&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2302
  Stats: 28 lines in 4 files changed: 16 ins; 2 del; 10 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1663.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1663/head:pull/1663

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1663

From erikj at openjdk.org  Wed Jun 26 07:13:43 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 07:13:43 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2307: PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor generates only one error
 message per Issue type [v2]
In-Reply-To: <mYD4kB8aKM6YLjvOwJyZQKl4VMWR8kdj1p3WdUMPl1M=.dd3be3bf-0fc2-44b8-a4f0-590c78691cb8@github.com>
References: <uuBlgY8Jo6nzNl7FZ-4m94i0-7Dj5MCD04ho0KqEOSg=.8d655de8-7e35-47a4-a7e3-9680f33e255e@github.com>
 <mYD4kB8aKM6YLjvOwJyZQKl4VMWR8kdj1p3WdUMPl1M=.dd3be3bf-0fc2-44b8-a4f0-590c78691cb8@github.com>
Message-ID: <cifhOrarjAJGp69sMQHPD-RDZW2rpeTl_UQQi8PPOhc=.b30a60bb-2289-4cc2-ba6e-e6b3972cd3e3@github.com>

On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 22:16:35 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> When testing [SKARA-2303](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2303), I found that even when there are few binary files in a diff, the pr body only warns about one binary file. Then I found that in PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor, we are using HashMap<Check, String> to store the error messages, so if there are few issues with the same type, the HashMap is only able to save the last error message.
>
> Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   set limit for error messages

Marked as reviewed by erikj (Lead).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1662#pullrequestreview-2140917324

From erikj at openjdk.org  Wed Jun 26 08:42:31 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 08:42:31 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2302: Notify when PR is ready for sponsor
In-Reply-To: <pviyWCytGghFNEXHrk_bB8Z6JDp6F4cWhrm8ra2XnU4=.55b94128-bb13-42f2-9a88-f9d74005eb23@github.com>
References: <pviyWCytGghFNEXHrk_bB8Z6JDp6F4cWhrm8ra2XnU4=.55b94128-bb13-42f2-9a88-f9d74005eb23@github.com>
Message-ID: <7oXNjIyQXuGQJ-emRomq1T2InoRDVlrxhewA3li-gIk=.f132cb60-5c87-4475-b51f-3a303f444a03@github.com>

On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 23:39:42 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> This patch is trying to make skara bot be able to send an email notification about the "pr is ready for sponsor" comment.

Marked as reviewed by erikj (Lead).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1663#pullrequestreview-2141133297

From zsong at openjdk.org  Wed Jun 26 18:44:13 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 18:44:13 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2302: Notify when PR is ready for sponsor
In-Reply-To: <pviyWCytGghFNEXHrk_bB8Z6JDp6F4cWhrm8ra2XnU4=.55b94128-bb13-42f2-9a88-f9d74005eb23@github.com>
References: <pviyWCytGghFNEXHrk_bB8Z6JDp6F4cWhrm8ra2XnU4=.55b94128-bb13-42f2-9a88-f9d74005eb23@github.com>
Message-ID: <-toF5SrRnTFlrTfZ7BxemL3TWCa5reSZlmwmbjswSTM=.d72a54b3-a013-4767-8ee1-4d3e9c221485@github.com>

On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 23:39:42 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> This patch is trying to make skara bot be able to send an email notification about the "pr is ready for sponsor" comment.

Thanks for the review!

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1663#issuecomment-2192404910

From zsong at openjdk.org  Wed Jun 26 18:44:13 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 18:44:13 GMT
Subject: Integrated: 2302: Notify when PR is ready for sponsor
In-Reply-To: <pviyWCytGghFNEXHrk_bB8Z6JDp6F4cWhrm8ra2XnU4=.55b94128-bb13-42f2-9a88-f9d74005eb23@github.com>
References: <pviyWCytGghFNEXHrk_bB8Z6JDp6F4cWhrm8ra2XnU4=.55b94128-bb13-42f2-9a88-f9d74005eb23@github.com>
Message-ID: <GocWHwOs28x3Nk6MYtzGwZ59hI9H_HL8WdIvwQNRHaE=.b9d73c82-d924-45fc-9e8d-4473e56f4614@github.com>

On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 23:39:42 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> This patch is trying to make skara bot be able to send an email notification about the "pr is ready for sponsor" comment.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 54a48dfd
Author:    Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/skara/commit/54a48dfdd952747b9e17349f0ce6cbd8493e81f3
Stats:     28 lines in 4 files changed: 16 ins; 2 del; 10 mod

2302: Notify when PR is ready for sponsor

Reviewed-by: erikj

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1663

From zsong at openjdk.org  Wed Jun 26 18:45:00 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 18:45:00 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2307: PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor generates only one error
 message per Issue type [v2]
In-Reply-To: <mYD4kB8aKM6YLjvOwJyZQKl4VMWR8kdj1p3WdUMPl1M=.dd3be3bf-0fc2-44b8-a4f0-590c78691cb8@github.com>
References: <uuBlgY8Jo6nzNl7FZ-4m94i0-7Dj5MCD04ho0KqEOSg=.8d655de8-7e35-47a4-a7e3-9680f33e255e@github.com>
 <mYD4kB8aKM6YLjvOwJyZQKl4VMWR8kdj1p3WdUMPl1M=.dd3be3bf-0fc2-44b8-a4f0-590c78691cb8@github.com>
Message-ID: <Q7xPIrs3xrqC_fdNoZvyyZwRs5CRewcB_duZGyhvnbE=.afa5ef73-770d-4a85-97cf-a49e9e8e6129@github.com>

On Tue, 25 Jun 2024 22:16:35 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> When testing [SKARA-2303](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2303), I found that even when there are few binary files in a diff, the pr body only warns about one binary file. Then I found that in PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor, we are using HashMap<Check, String> to store the error messages, so if there are few issues with the same type, the HashMap is only able to save the last error message.
>
> Zhao Song has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:
> 
>   set limit for error messages

Thanks for the review!

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1662#issuecomment-2192406202

From zsong at openjdk.org  Wed Jun 26 18:45:00 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2024 18:45:00 GMT
Subject: Integrated: 2307: PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor generates only one
 error message per Issue type
In-Reply-To: <uuBlgY8Jo6nzNl7FZ-4m94i0-7Dj5MCD04ho0KqEOSg=.8d655de8-7e35-47a4-a7e3-9680f33e255e@github.com>
References: <uuBlgY8Jo6nzNl7FZ-4m94i0-7Dj5MCD04ho0KqEOSg=.8d655de8-7e35-47a4-a7e3-9680f33e255e@github.com>
Message-ID: <jUup4VAQCJlKq7yKtzB3IXjI0L8spAieCxGppbW7sjU=.2304c9e9-a405-41fb-acb3-fd691e464d53@github.com>

On Mon, 24 Jun 2024 22:31:58 GMT, Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org> wrote:

> When testing [SKARA-2303](https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2303), I found that even when there are few binary files in a diff, the pr body only warns about one binary file. Then I found that in PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor, we are using HashMap<Check, String> to store the error messages, so if there are few issues with the same type, the HashMap is only able to save the last error message.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 0a81cd1b
Author:    Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/skara/commit/0a81cd1b3214c691dba47c2079e9f33556cca2d5
Stats:     36 lines in 3 files changed: 14 ins; 0 del; 22 mod

2307: PullRequestCheckIssueVisitor generates only one error message per Issue type

Reviewed-by: erikj

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1662

From prappo at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 28 09:23:50 2024
From: prappo at openjdk.org (Pavel Rappo)
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 09:23:50 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2310: Add missing commas in copyright years
Message-ID: <LoeX0iYfE9hvosPQceTAGVK3yFoG80jSgZX0FU0nXU4=.a046b792-611c-45cf-aa55-68f3d72336f7@github.com>

Please review this utmost trivial change.

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

Commit messages:
 - Initial commit

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1664/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1664&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2310
  Stats: 39 lines in 39 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 39 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1664.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1664/head:pull/1664

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1664

From erikj at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 28 15:19:02 2024
From: erikj at openjdk.org (Erik Joelsson)
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 15:19:02 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2310: Add missing commas in copyright years
In-Reply-To: <LoeX0iYfE9hvosPQceTAGVK3yFoG80jSgZX0FU0nXU4=.a046b792-611c-45cf-aa55-68f3d72336f7@github.com>
References: <LoeX0iYfE9hvosPQceTAGVK3yFoG80jSgZX0FU0nXU4=.a046b792-611c-45cf-aa55-68f3d72336f7@github.com>
Message-ID: <uR4RlJdoV3JfZBJyy78dEfccEAlBjsAWXQlFQ-YxHyo=.e3b0c096-861a-46fc-9685-925b560a887c@github.com>

On Fri, 28 Jun 2024 09:19:45 GMT, Pavel Rappo <prappo at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Please review this utmost trivial change.

Marked as reviewed by erikj (Lead).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1664#pullrequestreview-2148294186

From zsong at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 28 16:37:12 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:37:12 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2310: Add missing commas in copyright years
In-Reply-To: <LoeX0iYfE9hvosPQceTAGVK3yFoG80jSgZX0FU0nXU4=.a046b792-611c-45cf-aa55-68f3d72336f7@github.com>
References: <LoeX0iYfE9hvosPQceTAGVK3yFoG80jSgZX0FU0nXU4=.a046b792-611c-45cf-aa55-68f3d72336f7@github.com>
Message-ID: <qRzYeZUTAOJdPDR-jsKpIIbmy8luelAvbQ9z5egMFGM=.b64e3506-9bb3-4dba-9972-38e95a28613d@github.com>

On Fri, 28 Jun 2024 09:19:45 GMT, Pavel Rappo <prappo at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Please review this utmost trivial change.

Marked as reviewed by zsong (Reviewer).

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

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1664#pullrequestreview-2148458866

From prappo at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 28 17:31:53 2024
From: prappo at openjdk.org (Pavel Rappo)
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:31:53 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2311: Use getLast and removeLast methods for lists
Message-ID: <JltaTe9K_fPJzsBB5WwdVvJ_ja8gDeVPSb-i7Cy5WHg=.941d09d8-da96-4fe9-a466-e112cdc087ad@github.com>

Please review this simple refactoring to change most if not all occurrences of `list.get(x.size() - 1)` to `list.getLast()`.

`getLast` was introduced in JDK 21, as part of JEP 431: Sequenced Collections, which also introduced a counterpart method, `getFirst()`. While there are also a lot of occurrences of `list.get(0)` in Skara codebase, changing them to `list.getFirst()` might be of insufficient benefit and, hence, is not proposed in this PR. I don't think that coinciding `get(0)` and `getLast()` would look inconsistent.

The copyright years will be updated after this PR has been reviewed.

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

Commit messages:
 - Initial commit

Changes: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1665/files
  Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1665&range=00
  Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.org/browse/SKARA-2311
  Stats: 51 lines in 22 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 51 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1665.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1665/head:pull/1665

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1665

From prappo at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 28 21:15:10 2024
From: prappo at openjdk.org (Pavel Rappo)
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:15:10 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2310: Add missing commas in copyright years [v2]
In-Reply-To: <LoeX0iYfE9hvosPQceTAGVK3yFoG80jSgZX0FU0nXU4=.a046b792-611c-45cf-aa55-68f3d72336f7@github.com>
References: <LoeX0iYfE9hvosPQceTAGVK3yFoG80jSgZX0FU0nXU4=.a046b792-611c-45cf-aa55-68f3d72336f7@github.com>
Message-ID: <yWtsAJxiqzJdx-veSC1HdO4dgJ3F54I9YFMhylo9bFs=.2d7b1543-9da4-4f77-87f2-5738a0e92a46@github.com>

> Please review this utmost trivial change.

Pavel Rappo has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  Add an empty commit start GHA

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1664/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1664/files/9589fd9b..a4fa656e

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1664&range=01
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1664&range=00-01

  Stats: 0 lines in 0 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 0 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1664.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1664/head:pull/1664

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1664

From prappo at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 28 21:39:16 2024
From: prappo at openjdk.org (Pavel Rappo)
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:39:16 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2310: Add missing commas in copyright years [v3]
In-Reply-To: <LoeX0iYfE9hvosPQceTAGVK3yFoG80jSgZX0FU0nXU4=.a046b792-611c-45cf-aa55-68f3d72336f7@github.com>
References: <LoeX0iYfE9hvosPQceTAGVK3yFoG80jSgZX0FU0nXU4=.a046b792-611c-45cf-aa55-68f3d72336f7@github.com>
Message-ID: <s8ifXJyUFIq5M15WTqkifBs87pZW3WQxg0oQpfWJj6s=.cc0dc829-0cc5-443a-bac8-66378e91cac3@github.com>

> Please review this utmost trivial change.

Pavel Rappo has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains three additional commits since the last revision:

 - Merge branch 'master' into 2310
 - Add an empty commit start GHA
 - Initial commit

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1664/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1664/files/a4fa656e..2568dff4

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1664&range=02
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1664&range=01-02

  Stats: 124 lines in 9 files changed: 35 ins; 27 del; 62 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1664.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1664/head:pull/1664

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1664

From zsong at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 28 21:39:31 2024
From: zsong at openjdk.org (Zhao Song)
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:39:31 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2311: Use getLast and removeLast methods for lists
In-Reply-To: <JltaTe9K_fPJzsBB5WwdVvJ_ja8gDeVPSb-i7Cy5WHg=.941d09d8-da96-4fe9-a466-e112cdc087ad@github.com>
References: <JltaTe9K_fPJzsBB5WwdVvJ_ja8gDeVPSb-i7Cy5WHg=.941d09d8-da96-4fe9-a466-e112cdc087ad@github.com>
Message-ID: <_kWT-Sp9casFQgyzeo35C0aTcW8fTpLFJKqQWNMF3_w=.57e908e0-301f-4d4a-b5a8-c178590b1b1d@github.com>

On Fri, 28 Jun 2024 17:28:13 GMT, Pavel Rappo <prappo at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Please review this simple refactoring to change most if not all occurrences of `list.get(x.size() - 1)` to `list.getLast()`.
> 
> `getLast` was introduced in JDK 21, as part of JEP 431: Sequenced Collections, which also introduced a counterpart method, `getFirst()`. While there are also a lot of occurrences of `list.get(0)` in Skara codebase, changing them to `list.getFirst()` might be of insufficient benefit and, hence, is not proposed in this PR. I don't think that coinciding `get(0)` and `getLast()` would look inconsistent.
> 
> The copyright years will be updated after this PR has been reviewed.

LGTM! It's a very nice clean up.

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

Marked as reviewed by zsong (Reviewer).

PR Review: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1665#pullrequestreview-2149032585

From duke at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 28 22:30:51 2024
From: duke at openjdk.org (duke)
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:30:51 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2310: Add missing commas in copyright years [v3]
In-Reply-To: <s8ifXJyUFIq5M15WTqkifBs87pZW3WQxg0oQpfWJj6s=.cc0dc829-0cc5-443a-bac8-66378e91cac3@github.com>
References: <LoeX0iYfE9hvosPQceTAGVK3yFoG80jSgZX0FU0nXU4=.a046b792-611c-45cf-aa55-68f3d72336f7@github.com>
 <s8ifXJyUFIq5M15WTqkifBs87pZW3WQxg0oQpfWJj6s=.cc0dc829-0cc5-443a-bac8-66378e91cac3@github.com>
Message-ID: <LJNCXk1hb-Vv-xWbielJGvUYbkLrALU4oKKx4ro3ENE=.a87ad17c-0798-41cd-afb5-4f3d08495144@github.com>

On Fri, 28 Jun 2024 21:39:16 GMT, Pavel Rappo <prappo at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> Please review this utmost trivial change.
>
> Pavel Rappo has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains three additional commits since the last revision:
> 
>  - Merge branch 'master' into 2310
>  - Add an empty commit start GHA
>  - Initial commit

@pavelrappo 
Your change (at version 2568dff4e9cbce7e27ceb6450e1c4fefc1530e10) is now ready to be sponsored by a Committer.

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

PR Comment: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1664#issuecomment-2197732525

From prappo at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 28 22:43:18 2024
From: prappo at openjdk.org (Pavel Rappo)
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:43:18 GMT
Subject: Integrated: 2310: Add missing commas in copyright years
In-Reply-To: <LoeX0iYfE9hvosPQceTAGVK3yFoG80jSgZX0FU0nXU4=.a046b792-611c-45cf-aa55-68f3d72336f7@github.com>
References: <LoeX0iYfE9hvosPQceTAGVK3yFoG80jSgZX0FU0nXU4=.a046b792-611c-45cf-aa55-68f3d72336f7@github.com>
Message-ID: <-Hjw-NqXfd4rEEJHlpJbMM_Qio0kirgBDED1lQ83DAs=.f6274e80-6fd7-4d10-aaa9-057dec9d6586@github.com>

On Fri, 28 Jun 2024 09:19:45 GMT, Pavel Rappo <prappo at openjdk.org> wrote:

> Please review this utmost trivial change.

This pull request has now been integrated.

Changeset: 44d92768
Author:    Pavel Rappo <prappo at openjdk.org>
Committer: Zhao Song <zsong at openjdk.org>
URL:       https://git.openjdk.org/skara/commit/44d927687865c52ee3fcd7733943db7cd1db7067
Stats:     39 lines in 39 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 39 mod

2310: Add missing commas in copyright years

Reviewed-by: erikj, zsong

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

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1664

From prappo at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 28 22:48:07 2024
From: prappo at openjdk.org (Pavel Rappo)
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 22:48:07 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2311: Use getLast and removeLast methods for lists [v2]
In-Reply-To: <JltaTe9K_fPJzsBB5WwdVvJ_ja8gDeVPSb-i7Cy5WHg=.941d09d8-da96-4fe9-a466-e112cdc087ad@github.com>
References: <JltaTe9K_fPJzsBB5WwdVvJ_ja8gDeVPSb-i7Cy5WHg=.941d09d8-da96-4fe9-a466-e112cdc087ad@github.com>
Message-ID: <opk9cIKZ5j3PhCaasNcMd17R9AjbYTaRwi4-n4EksKs=.2dc12e0e-b492-4571-8982-85c7d63f6989@github.com>

> Please review this simple refactoring to change most if not all occurrences of `list.get(x.size() - 1)` to `list.getLast()`.
> 
> `getLast` was introduced in JDK 21, as part of JEP 431: Sequenced Collections, which also introduced a counterpart method, `getFirst()`. While there are also a lot of occurrences of `list.get(0)` in Skara codebase, changing them to `list.getFirst()` might be of insufficient benefit and, hence, is not proposed in this PR. I don't think that coinciding `get(0)` and `getLast()` would look inconsistent.
> 
> The copyright years will be updated after this PR has been reviewed.

Pavel Rappo has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in by the merge/rebase. The pull request contains two additional commits since the last revision:

 - Merge branch 'openjdk:master' into 2311
 - Initial commit

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1665/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1665/files/ceace51a..9680af96

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1665&range=01
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1665&range=00-01

  Stats: 163 lines in 48 files changed: 35 ins; 27 del; 101 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1665.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1665/head:pull/1665

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1665

From prappo at openjdk.org  Fri Jun 28 23:05:30 2024
From: prappo at openjdk.org (Pavel Rappo)
Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 23:05:30 GMT
Subject: RFR: 2311: Use getLast and removeLast methods for lists [v3]
In-Reply-To: <JltaTe9K_fPJzsBB5WwdVvJ_ja8gDeVPSb-i7Cy5WHg=.941d09d8-da96-4fe9-a466-e112cdc087ad@github.com>
References: <JltaTe9K_fPJzsBB5WwdVvJ_ja8gDeVPSb-i7Cy5WHg=.941d09d8-da96-4fe9-a466-e112cdc087ad@github.com>
Message-ID: <AFTz3cv8GOubjtSCx7CGSQrFw2WK8BZBtkxgYvF80_s=.016f2f71-e42d-4147-86f6-f93306494210@github.com>

> Please review this simple refactoring to change most if not all occurrences of `list.get(x.size() - 1)` to `list.getLast()`.
> 
> `getLast` was introduced in JDK 21, as part of JEP 431: Sequenced Collections, which also introduced a counterpart method, `getFirst()`. While there are also a lot of occurrences of `list.get(0)` in Skara codebase, changing them to `list.getFirst()` might be of insufficient benefit and, hence, is not proposed in this PR. I don't think that coinciding `get(0)` and `getLast()` would look inconsistent.
> 
> The copyright years will be updated after this PR has been reviewed.

Pavel Rappo has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision:

  Update copyright years
  
  Note: any commit hashes below might be outdated due to subsequent
  history rewriting (e.g. git rebase).
  
   + update args/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/args/ArgumentParser.java due to ceace51a
   + update bots/bridgekeeper/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/bridgekeeper/PullRequestPrunerBot.java due to ceace51a
   + update bots/bridgekeeper/src/test/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/bridgekeeper/PullRequestPrunerBotTests.java due to ceace51a
   + update bots/cli/src/test/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/cli/BotSlackHandlerTests.java due to ceace51a
   + update bots/mlbridge/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/mlbridge/ArchiveItem.java due to ceace51a
   + update bots/notify/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/notify/mailinglist/MailingListNotifier.java due to ceace51a
   + update bots/notify/src/test/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/notify/issue/IssueNotifierTests.java due to ceace51a
   + update bots/notify/src/test/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/notify/prbranch/PullRequestBranchNotifierTests.java due to ceace51a
   + update bots/pr/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/ReviewersTracker.java due to ceace51a
   + update bots/pr/src/test/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/CSRBotTests.java due to ceace51a
   + update bots/pr/src/test/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/CommitCommandAsserts.java due to ceace51a
   + update bots/pr/src/test/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/IntegrateTests.java due to ceace51a
   + update bots/pr/src/test/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/SponsorTests.java due to ceace51a
   + update forge/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/forge/PullRequest.java due to ceace51a
   + update test/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/test/HostCredentials.java due to ceace51a
   + update vcs/src/test/java/org/openjdk/skara/vcs/openjdk/converter/GitToHgConverterTests.java due to ceace51a
   + update webrev/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/webrev/HunkCoalescer.java due to ceace51a

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

Changes:
  - all: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1665/files
  - new: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1665/files/9680af96..6e17f33c

Webrevs:
 - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1665&range=02
 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.org/?repo=skara&pr=1665&range=01-02

  Stats: 17 lines in 17 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 17 mod
  Patch: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1665.diff
  Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.org/skara.git pull/1665/head:pull/1665

PR: https://git.openjdk.org/skara/pull/1665