[8u communication] JDK 8 Updates porting process (original) (raw)
Philip Race philip.race at oracle.com
Sat Mar 25 15:16:08 UTC 2017
- Previous message: [8u communication] JDK 8 Updates porting process
- Next message: [8u, 9] RFR(S): 8177095: Range check dependent CastII/ConvI2L is prematurely eliminated
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Could we use 9-bp instead of 9-pool ? 9-bp strikes a bit more urgency without identifying a release.
X-pool has traditionally been the Sargasso Sea of releases
-phil.
On 3/25/17, 3:20 AM, Seán Coffey wrote:
With JDK 9 now entering the RDP2 phase, the bar for getting fixes into that release is high. A current requirement for JDK 8u fixes is ensuring that the changes are integrated into later JDK release families first [Rule 1, [1]]. If jdk8u ports are being blocked because of this, please let the JDK 8 Update Project maintainers know.
While we wait for the JDK 9 Updates Project to form, I'd like to propose that we allow ports from JDK 10 into JDK 8 Updates where needed. We can open a '9-pool' record to track the JDK 9 port. I'll make the proposed change to the JDK 8 Updates rules next Friday if no objections are heard. [1] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk8u/groundrules.html
- Previous message: [8u communication] JDK 8 Updates porting process
- Next message: [8u, 9] RFR(S): 8177095: Range check dependent CastII/ConvI2L is prematurely eliminated
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]