On 9/13/11 7:14 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
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.
Meaning this is already in icedtea ? But still ..
OpenJDK6 is not going to disappear over night, especially when OpenJDK7
is still largely untested and doesn't have a TCK available.
I don't know about "largely untested" as its been TCKed and its the RI
for 7 ...
its mostly the same as the commercial product ... etc ..
We stopped pro-actively backporting to "closed" 6 what seems like eons
ago in favour of 7.
According to http://openjdk.java.net/census/#andrew, I'm listed as an
OpenJDK6 reviewer. Does this not mean I can approve such backports?
Reviewer means that the code is OK, but "individual engineer reviewing
code" != "product/release owner"
-phil.
-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
