OpenJDK 6 and 6u10 features
Joseph D. Darcy
Joe.Darcy at Sun.COM
Mon Nov 3 15:49:53 PST 2008
Mark Wielaard wrote:
> Hi Joe,
> On Fri, 2008-10-31 at 15:48 -0700, Joseph D. Darcy wrote:
>> OpenJDK 6 build 12 contained ports of bug fixes from a number of 6u10
>> component areas (corba, jaxp, jaxws, langtools). 
> Are these component areas now completely in sync?
All the fixes from those areas missing from OpenJDK 6 have been
incorporated. In OpenJDK 6, corba has an additional build fix to avoid
the need for a scheme interpreter (thanks Andrew!) and langtools has a
few dozen additional fixes inherited by when it branched off of JDK 7.
At a code semantics level, the jaxp and jaxws workspaces in 6u10 and
OpenJDK 6 are virtually identical (but the licenses differ).
>> Most changes from
>> the core jdk component area of 6u10 were not ported. The porting effort
>> that took place of a relatively small number of bugs to a subset of the
>> full OpenJDK code base was still a sizeable effort.  The full set of
>> changes made to the core jdk in 6u10 is many times larger with a
>> proportionally larger porting cost.
> Is there a list of these changes/bugs that are in 6u10, but not in
> openjdk6 yet?
Not externally, no (it is a long list).
> What about hotspot? I saw they will start using Mercurial directly. That
> should help with syncing that workspace also.
Yes, I'm discussing with the HotSpot team options for managing that code
with OpenJDK 6.
>> We at Sun do not plan to do a
>> wholesale port of those 6u10 features from the core jdk to OpenJDK 6.
>> However, over the coming months we will be porting those 6u10 features
>> to OpenJDK 7 and we would welcome community assistance in backporting
>> appropriate features from OpenJDK 7 to OpenJDK 6.
> I think people will be happy to (at least it sounds fun to me). If you
> provide a list of changesets that went into 7 and are candidates for 6
> we can setup a schedule for backporting.
Yes, I'll work with the client team to see how we can get a
notification/signaling mechanism for when such changes go back.
>> (These jdk area
>> features in 6u10 are separate from plugin and webstart functionality.)
> What is the future of the plugin/webstart functionality? In IcedTea we
> do have free replacements.
> Ideally in the end we should see the people doing the closedjdk6 update
> releases base their updates on openjdk6 workspaces instead of using a
> fork. That would consolidate more work on a shared repository. What
> steps would be necessary for the various workspaces to be shared
> commonly between closed/openjdk6?
> If that is too much work, or unfeasible because there are still too many
> proprietary blobs in closedjdk6, would it be an idea to have a jdk7
> spurt to get to a common shared code base sooner? Is there a timeline
> for 7 yet?
I think it is unlikely there will ever be full sharing between the
OpenJDK 6 and 6 update code bases; although at least some of the areas
can and will be shared. There should be more concrete timeline for JDK
7 in the near future.
More information about the jdk6-dev