Proposal to revise forest graph and integration practices for JDK 9

mark.reinhold at mark.reinhold at
Mon Dec 9 14:52:05 PST 2013

2013/12/5 1:39 -0800, mark.reinhold at
> 2013/12/2 16:37 -0800, joe.darcy at
>> On 12/02/2013 11:50 AM, mark.reinhold at wrote:
>>> Can you say more about your discomfort?  Eliminating the master/dev
>>> distinction is another good simplification, I think, and if we're
>>> going to shake things up anyway then now is a good time to do it.
>> I would expect some hiccups transitioning to the new model; dev *should* 
>> be stable, but a problem may be found later than desired, etc.  Having a 
>> separate master forest, and the potential to make out-of-band 
>> integrations to it, allows an easy remedy to such a situation by doing 
>> what we do know.
> We can make an out-of-band fix to a unified master/dev forest simply by
> updating the jdk9-current tag:
> ...

On further thought, I withdraw my suggestion that we eliminate
the master forest in JDK 9 at this time.

I think this is worth exploring further, but right now it's more
important to get the JDK 9 forests up and running.

- Mark

More information about the jdk9-dev mailing list