Hello Alan
According the the bylaws
http://openjdk.java.net/bylaws#veto
"If a Veto is raised then the voter who raised the veto and those who
support the proposed action
must work together to reach a mutually-agreeable resolution."
Since I definitely support the commiter status for Mikhail I would like
to reply on your comment
and respectfully disagree with the veto, please see my comments inline
On 14.10.2013 4:20, Alan Bateman wrote:
Vote: Veto
The guidelines suggest at least 8 significant contributions but some
of the changes cited in the nomination don't appear (at least on the
surface) to be significant.
Having worked in the client JDK libraries for about 10 years I find it
difficult to judge the fixes for another part of the JDK.
A fix which doesn't look very complicated might actually require a lot
of efforts and deep knowledge of the codebase.
For example, one of the changes is a one-line fix,
I have personally seen quite a lot of one-line fixes that were more
significant then any 100 lines fix.
Sometimes only after several fix iterations/testing on different
platforms you can find that particular line to be changed.
I am not sure what fix you are referring to, probably this one:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7u/jdk7u-dev/jdk/rev/5f14712b3dd5
This is a fix for a bug filed by the SQE team who found one of the
regression test failed on Mac OS.
The Mac port of the JDK 7 was released only a year ago, so any
regressions there attract greater attention for the client team.
In order to fix the problem Mikhail had to make sure that it wasn't a
problem in the JDK code but the test is to be corrected.
This wasn't something trivial given the implementation of the UI is so
different on Mac.
Mikhail also needed enough expertise to come up with a solution that
wouldn't break the test
for Linux, Windows and Solaris, the platforms that have their one GUI
specifics.
another is a two-line update to a properties file,
I guess you mean this patch:
http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7u/jdk7u-dev/jdk/rev/2dc2b6b34b00
First of all this fix is for an urgent customer bug
https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8005932
I don't see how fixing a P2 bug may be seen as not significant.
It did require a change in a property file, but there were a lot of work
behind the scene.
Just understanding that adding that property will fix the problem and
won't break any other code
requires quite a deep expertise.
another is the addition of a method with two lines of implementation.
The same story is here, Mikhail is a JDK sustaining team member and he
is working on pretty important fixes
which I don't think can be measured by the number of changed lines.
As a former tech lead of the Swing team I can say that the trickiest
fixes may take only a few lines of code and tons of time and knowledge.
In no way is this veto meant to be any reflection of the good work
that Mikhail is doing, he's really just that the nomination is a bit
premature.
I kindly ask you to revise you veto and support Mikhail
Thanks
alexp
-Alan.
