[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       openjdk-build-dev
Subject:    Re: OpenJDK build system might need to be adapted for Sun Solaris Sparc/SmartOS
From:       Sriram Narayanan <sriramnrn () gmail ! com>
Date:       2017-05-31 23:37:21
Message-ID: CANiY96arqXzc16prFZg0hZG8e0zFrF5JvYeYQBULtsnhp3qG9Q () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 8:26 PM, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz <
glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de> wrote:

> On Wed, May 31, 2017 at 02:12:16PM +0200, Mario Torre wrote:
> > I can't check the patches in detail now, but I see that the discussion
> > on those threads doesn't go much on the technical side but rather
> > focus on whether Oracle should support or not their own products :)
>
> Well, I wish we could focus on the technical side.
>
> > I think David's reply was highlighting the actual points instead:
> >
> > * The status of linux-sparc as a port in OpenJDK 9 (or 8u) is unclear
> > * There is no way you will get them JDK 9 at this stage, this work
> > needs to be done on 10
>
> I just want the changes to get merged into what would be HEAD in git
> terms, just to get them off my plate.
>
> > * Hotspot group leads should have a say on this
> >
> > I think it makes sense to seek the hotspot leads approval for that
> > work before anything else.
>
> For one-liner patches?
>
> > >> In the meantime perhaps I would suggest to get in touch with the
> > >> distro-pkg-dev people since they may help you, even if this is not
> > >> Linux specific.
> > >
> > > I am one of the maintainers of the Debian/sparc64 port and we have the
> > > possibility to add distro-specific patches. However, I don't want to
> > > carry these patches around forever but rather get them merged upstream
> > > and make them available to all downstreams, not just Debian.
> > >
> >
> > The way we have done that in the past is exactly this, slowly merge
> > upstream all the downstream specific changes, it's a process that
> > takes a lot of time, especially at the beginning when you need to
> > build trust and experience with the upstream developers.
>
> That's sound very slow and painful. I don't think this way you will be
> able to attract contributors in the future. If such minor changes
> already involve so much discussion, most contributors will refrain
> from sending in patches which is sad because it means lots of good
> patches and ideas will never get merged.
>

I agree.

I think such deliberation is the right thing to do for design changes and
alterations or additions to fundamentals.

For smaller changes,

I would urge the devs to consider "it depends" when deciding just how much
debate and deliberation is needed for a contribution.


>
> Adrian
>
> --
>  .''`.  John Paul Adrian Glaubitz
> : :' :  Debian Developer - glaubitz@debian.org
> `. `'   Freie Universitaet Berlin - glaubitz@physik.fu-berlin.de
>   `-    GPG: 62FF 8A75 84E0 2956 9546  0006 7426 3B37 F5B5 F913
>
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]