[7u6] Request for phase 2 approval for CR 7188168: 7071904 broke the DEBUG_BINARIES option on Linux

Andrew Hughes ahughes at redhat.com
Tue Aug 14 16:14:09 PDT 2012


----- Original Message -----
> +1 on getting a clearer communication around 7u deadlines Andrew.
> Hopefully we can make progress there. Unfortunately, it was just some
> unlucky timing around a phase 2 approval request in this case.
> 

No worries; we can only improve on such things in future.

> I've updated 7188168 to represent your push to 7u-dev.
> 

Great!  Thanks.

> regards,
> Sean.
> 
> On 13/08/2012 20:32, Andrew Hughes wrote:
> > ----- Original Message -----
> >> On 8/10/12 7:52 PM, Andrew Hughes wrote:
> >>> ----- Original Message -----
> >>>> Andrew,
> >>>>
> >>>> Unfortunately this request comes very late in the 7u6
> >>>> stabilization
> >>>> phase. Thorough testing & analysis is almost complete and we're
> >>>> preparing for release.
> >>> Hmmm... was this announced somewhere?  All I see in my archives
> >>> are
> >>> the initial
> >>> announcement of the branch and I vaguely recall something about
> >>> "August", nothing
> >>> more specific, but I may have missed something.
> >> I believe that Sean's 'phase 2 progress' mail came in while you
> >> were
> >> on vacation:
> >> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk7u-dev/2012-July/003862.html
> >>
> > I think this is where I remember the "August" reference from.  I
> > think
> > exact deadlines will help as we see more community involvement in
> > jdk7u.
> >
> >>> Is there a webpage that tracks the release process?  I don't see
> >>> anything on
> >>> http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk7u/  It would be easier for
> >>> us
> >>> to work
> >>> to deadlines if we knew what they were :-)
> >> That'd be a good thing for us to add for 7u8.
> >>   
> > Something as simple as a few bullet points with the proposed dates
> > for
> > each stage & release would be good enough.  Having this in a
> > calendar-parsable
> > format would be a bonus.
> >
> >>> >From our perspective, this is critical.  Without this fixed,
> >>> >tools
> >>> can't work with the debug information on x86.
> >>>
> >>> We can work around this by patching in IcedTea (we've actually
> >>> already
> >>> applied it there) but we're working towards a scenario where we
> >>> will be
> >>> able to use OpenJDK directly and avoid IcedTea.  If we're not
> >>> able
> >>> to get
> >>> fixes in during the latter stages of a release, then making such
> >>> a
> >>> switch
> >>> becomes unfeasible.
> >> I think this fix would have been a good fit in phase 2 for 7u6 if
> >> it
> >> had
> >> come in a week or two ago in late July, and maybe even early
> >> August -
> >> around the
> >> tim of Sean's e-mail above. Given that we can work around it in
> >> Icedtea, I think
> >> it's a better fit for 7u8 now - that's the low risk choice.
> >>
> > I see your point.  It was partly to test the waters to see how
> > feasible
> > working directly with OpenJDK is.  Still work to be done on both
> > sides.
> >
> >> I think we'll need to give some thought to downstream testing
> >> cycles
> >> for 7u8 to
> >> ensure that we can catch and fix any such regressions earlier
> >> during
> >> the development
> >> of the release.
> >>
> > On our side, we have been tracking things a lot more closely for
> > u6.
> > We branched at about the same time for 2.3 and I expect a release
> > around
> > the same time.
> >
> >>>> With this issue not affecting the product
> >>>> JDK bits,
> >>> I'm not sure what you mean.  Can you explain?  This does affect
> >>> what we ship.
> >> I think that Sean meant the regular, default build.
> >>
> > As we have with IcedTea, we probably need to decide which build
> > options
> > we regard as critical to release and which not.
> >
> >>>> can I ask that you push this fix to the jdk7u-dev repo
> >>>> instead.
> >>> Well, I was going to propose it for the main tree too, but I went
> >>> for u6 first
> >>> as I was aware there was less time for that.  Apparently, there's
> >>> even less than
> >>> I thought... :-)  Do I need to send a fresh mail for this or can
> >>> I
> >>> just push?
> >> No need to send a fresh mail, consider it approved for 7u8. And
> >> thanks for
> >> catching & fixing the issue!
> >>
> > Thanks.
> > Pushed:
> > http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7u/jdk7u-dev/hotspot/rev/aff265cb73a3
> >
> >> cheers,
> >> dalibor topic
> >> --
> >> Oracle <http://www.oracle.com>
> >> Dalibor Topic | Principal Product Manager
> >> Phone: +494089091214 <tel:+494089091214> | Mobile: +491737185961
> >> <tel:+491737185961>
> >> Oracle Java Platform Group
> >>
> >> ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Nagelsweg 55 | 20097 Hamburg
> >>
> >> ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG
> >> Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 München
> >> Registergericht: Amtsgericht München, HRA 95603
> >> Geschäftsführer: Jürgen Kunz
> >>
> >> Komplementärin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V.
> >> Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande
> >> Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697
> >> Geschäftsführer: Alexander van der Ven, Astrid Kepper, Val Maher
> >>
> >> Green Oracle <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is
> >> committed
> >> to developing practices and products that help protect the
> >> environment
> >>
> 
> 

-- 
Andrew :)

Free Java Software Engineer
Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com)

PGP Key: 248BDC07 (https://keys.indymedia.org/)
Fingerprint = EC5A 1F5E C0AD 1D15 8F1F  8F91 3B96 A578 248B DC07




More information about the jdk7u-dev mailing list