Request for Review: Java SE 8 Compact Profiles

David Holmes david.holmes at
Sat Dec 22 01:01:01 UTC 2012

On 22/12/2012 10:11 AM, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
> On Dec 21, 2012, at 3:27 PM, David Holmes wrote:
>>> On, it seems like you have just deleted a warning that
>>> someone explicitly asked for
>>> a class to be included, and also explicitly asked for that class to be
>>> excluded.
>>> If we are changing the tool so that exclusion just silently trumps any
>>> inclusion request, seems like we
>>> should just do that and delete this message. I'm fine with that, but the
>>> if(false) seems a bit terse.
>> Yes ideally this change will trigger a closer look at jarreorder and how it is used. AFAIK those listings have been decaying. But the warning message was far too noisy for the profiles builds. I did not want to go down a path of trying to define per-profile reorder lists given that we haven't maintained this for the full JRE anyway.
> Can we add a comment as to that being the reason for the if(false)?  Maybe file a separate Issue to fix it someday,
> or maybe toss the whole ball of JarReorder wax someday. ;^)

Okay I'll add a comment and comment out the line and see if there is an 
existing CR to revisit jarreorder.

>>> Why are some of the makefiles named with a ".txt" suffix? Like
>>> makefiles/profile-includes.txt?
>> Because they aren't makefiles ;-) They are txt files that define named lists that happen to be compatible with makefile variable declarations.
> But they aren't plain text files, right?

What is a plain text file ??? They look like make variable declarations, 
they also look like property definitions. I liken these files to the 
version.numbers file that happen to contain stuff that looks like 
makefile variable declarations - should they be .gmk files too?

>> These lists also get used by other tools eg javac and javadoc.
> Do we have any convention for the file suffix on these yet? Or is the long term plan to just use .txt?

Right now it is the .txt. If we want/need to change this then now is the 
time as I'll have to sync this with the langtools changes. Not a huge 
deal to change later I suppose. But I'm not sure there is any obviously 
better choice.

>>> Unfortunately, everybody on build-infra will be busy for a few weeks
>>> trying to get the cutover done. :^(
>> Not to mention the Xmas/NewYear break. :(
> Yeah, might be a limited vacation for some of us.

Limited vacation, limited weekends, ... ;-)


> -kto
>> Thanks,
>> David
>>> -kto

More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list