Hi Tom,
Your interest seems to be more in the libraries area, so redirecting
this conversation to core-lib-...@openjdk.java.net.
There is quite a complete OpenJDK Developers Guide that describes the
process and guidance.
<https://openjdk.org/guide/>
The OpenJDK Developers' Guide <https://openjdk.org/guide/>
<https://openjdk.org/guide/>
There is already quite a bit of process and discussions of process fit
into the mail alias for the DevGuide:
*guide-dev* <https://mail.openjdk.org/mailman/listinfo/guide-dev>
Technical discussion related to the Developers' Guide Project
*guide-discuss*
<https://mail.openjdk.org/mailman/listinfo/guide-discuss> General
discussion of topics related to the OpenJDK Developers' Guide
There are separate email aliases for the VM, language, compiler, and
subareas of the libraries.
For all the Mailing Lists see: https://mail.openjdk.org/mailman/listinfo
Regards, Roger
On 11/1/24 10:54 AM, Chen Liang wrote:
Hello Tom,
There is a standard template for bug reports at
https://bugreport.java.com/bugreport/
<https://bugreport.java.com/bugreport/>. Unfortunately, there are
many antique bugs in the JBS which are forgotten, so they may be
obsolete (no longer valid) or their reproduction steps have changed;
we cannot do much. Also, you don't always have to write identical
regression tests as in the bug report; often times you can write
simpler cases with professional test suites like JUnit, and that's at
least the trend on the core libraries side of the JDK.
You said you want a definition of "done." Where did you see that term?
In the JBS, you should look for bugs with "Resolution" that is
"Unresolved." If you mean for sending patches, we recommend that when
you open a PR, it should be complete with tests as if it can be
immediately merged, so that you don't have to push more unless public
review request changes.
Chen
------------------------------------------------------------------------
*From:* jdk-dev <jdk-dev-r...@openjdk.org> on behalf of Tom Mooney
<tom.moo...@bjss.com>
*Sent:* Friday, November 1, 2024 9:45 AM
*To:* jdk-...@openjdk.org <jdk-...@openjdk.org>
*Subject:* Using a standard bug report template and a definition of done
Has the project tried a standardized bug report template before with
supplied test data and exact steps to reproduce the bug? I feel that
this would help contributors very quickly reproduce the bug exactly as
it was originally produced, possibly write a regression test(s) for it
(where applicable) and be able to get to the business of fixing it as
soon as possible. Plus it could make it easier for new contributors
like me to get started faster. Its just that I've been browsing new
bugs for something to work on and I find it difficult to be able to
confirm when I've actually fixed it (apart from not seeing the same
error messages produced). I could volunteer such a template it was
deemed by the mailing list as something that would be useful. Perhaps
a definition of done too would be useful so that bug fixers can know
when they are truly done and they could mail the evidence along with
their patches for review giving them a better chance of getting their
contributions accepted.
Ta
Tom
The information included in this email and any files transmitted with
it may contain information that is confidential and it must not be
used by, or its contents or attachments copied or disclosed to,
persons other than the intended addressee. If you have received this
email in error, please notify BJSS. In the absence of written
agreement to the contrary BJSS' relevant standard terms of contract
for any work to be undertaken will apply. Please carry out virus or
such other checks as you consider appropriate in respect of this
email. BJSS does not accept responsibility for any adverse effect upon
your system or data in relation to this email or any files transmitted
with it. BJSS Limited, a company registered in England and Wales
(Company Number 2777575), VAT Registration Number 613295452,
Registered Office Address, 1 Whitehall Quay, Leeds, LS1 4HR
