general question about java port PRs

[Herve Quiroz]

I agree with that: only use the Java category for JDK issues. I still
have a problem to decide whether a PR related to bsd.java.mk should be
sent in 'java' or 'ports'.

Anyway, I have decided sometime ago to submit everything related to
ports in 'ports', unless it is identified as a 'java' issue, i.e. an
issue that shoud be discussed on freebsd-java@ (such as bsd.java.mk
stuff, JAR location...).

I think you're right to wonder about that Mark, because we are probably
doing wrong only because of the lack of an established (and published)
policy.

BTW, maybe this decision should be notified in the Java section of the
porter's handbook so Java porters know what to do with their PRs.

Herve

On Tue, May 18, 2004 at 10:30:13AM +0300, Panagiotis Astithas wrote:
> Mark Linimon wrote:
> >I was surprised to find that some of the Java ports had PRs filed
> >against them, but not under the 'ports' category, instead under the
> >'java' classification.  As some of you may be aware, I have written a
> >set of programs that attempt to track the status of ports PRs and
> >correlate them with build errors seen on the build farm (among other
> >data: see portsmon.firepipe.net).  However, I only track things under
> >'ports', not 'java'.
> >
> >Shouldn't the 'java' category be reserved for such things as problems
> >with the JDK/JREs, or would you prefer that these ports PRs be left in
> >that category as well?
> 
> I have been wondering about that as well. I believe that the 'java' 
> category should be reserved for JDKs. Ordinary port upgrades and problem 
> reports could benefit from the larger pool of commiters & volunteers 
> monitoring the freebsd-ports list. I think that only three persons 
> attend to java PRs (glewis, phantom & znerd).
> 
> Cheers,