On 17:43 Tue 13 Sep , Kelly O'Hair wrote: > With Phil's comments. Then I approve. > > These OpenJDK6 changes are tailing off, right? > Are there many more planned? >
No. There are still about a hundred OpenJDK backports in IcedTea6 and we keep finding more. OpenJDK6 is not going to disappear over night, especially when OpenJDK7 is still largely untested and doesn't have a TCK available. According to http://openjdk.java.net/census/#andrew, I'm listed as an OpenJDK6 reviewer. Does this not mean I can approve such backports? > -kto > > On Sep 13, 2011, at 5:38 PM, Phil Race wrote: > > > The backport looks fine and I think it far more likely that without this > > fix, > > we'll be writing invalid images, rather than breaking anything people > > have constructed to work around it .. ie they'd have learn to avoid this. > > > > So OK by me to backport but I'm not sure there's a need to continue > > such backports for much longer when you can get JDK 7 instead. > > Or maybe this isn't proactive .. did you have a user/customer asking for it? > > > > -phil. > > > > On 9/13/11 4:57 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote: > >> On 11:59 Tue 13 Sep , Kelly O'Hair wrote: > >>> I am scratching my head on this one. > >>> > >>> I am not an imageio expert, but from what I read I am a bit concerned > >>> that people may have found > >>> workarounds for this problem, and this change could possibly break their > >>> workarounds. > >>> I know that sounds silly, but there it is. Is that possible? > >>> > >>> Can someone assure me that this change is harmless to the current > >>> complete jdk6 community? > >>> > >> People can do all sorts of crazy hacks in their own code. We shouldn't > >> not fix bugs > >> because there's a risk it might break someone's code. If that was true, > >> nothing would > >> ever get done. > >> > >> Besides, given the fix is already in 7, such hacks are going to be broken > >> now anyway. > >> > >>> -kto > >>> > >>> On Sep 12, 2011, at 11:24 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote: > >>> > >>>> On 10:25 Mon 12 Sep , Pavel Tisnovsky wrote: > >>>>> Greetings, > >>>>> > >>>>> I'd like to backport the following change: > >>>>> "6296893: BMP Writer handles TopDown property incorrectly > >>>>> for some of the compression types" into OpenJDK6 > >>>>> > >>>>> Webrev is available here: > >>>>> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~ptisnovs/6296893/ > >>>>> > >>>>> This change has been tested without problems (including the new > >>>>> regression test > >>>>> included in this backport). > >>>>> > >>>>> Can anybody please review this change& assign bug ID to it? > >>>>> > >>>>> Thank you in advance, > >>>>> Pavel > >>>> You already have a bug ID; 6296893. > >>>> > >>>> Can I approve this as an OpenJDK6 reviewer? > >>>> -- > >>>> Andrew :) > >>>> > >>>> Free Java Software Engineer > >>>> Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) > >>>> > >>>> Support Free Java! > >>>> Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea > >>>> http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath > >>>> http://icedtea.classpath.org > >>>> PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) > >>>> Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 > > > -- Andrew :) Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) Support Free Java! Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath http://icedtea.classpath.org PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37
