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

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