Initial forests for JDK 9

Mario Torre neugens.limasoftware at
Tue Dec 10 15:02:19 PST 2013

Il 10/dic/2013 22:53 "John Coomes" <John.Coomes at> ha scritto:
> mark.reinhold at (mark.reinhold at wrote:
> > I'd like to go forward with Joe's proposal [1], as informed by our
> > discussion over the last two weeks.  My thanks to Joe for driving
> > the conversation.
> >
> > To summarize, under we'll have:
> >
> >   jdk9    "Master" forest -- a time-delayed, stable version of "dev"
> >
> >   dev      Default development forest -- replaces the current "tl"
> >            forest, integrates directly into the master
> >
> >   client   Client development forest (AWT, 2D, Swing) -- integrates
> >            into "dev" after suitable manual testing
> >
> >   hotspot  HotSpot development forest -- integrates into "dev"
> Please name the above tree "hotspot-dev" instead of "hotspot", to
> avoid having a tree with the same name as a repo contained within it.
> During jdk7 development we used http://.../jdk7/hotspot/hotspot; it
> made conversations rather awkward and somtimes lead to confusion,
> since the term "hotspot" was ambiguous.
> > There will also be HotSpot group forests (hotspot-{comp,emb,gc,rt}), at
> > least for now.
> >
> > We'll create these forests on Thursday as clones of the JDK 8 master
> > forest, at tag jdk8-b120.
> >
> > I will, as suggested, fold active HSX and Nashorn contributors into the
> > appropriate JDK 9 Project roles.
> >
> > To be specific: If you hold the Author, Committer, or Reviewer role in
> > the JDK 8 Project [2], the HSX Project [3], the Nashorn Project [4], or
> > some combination of these Projects, and you have contributed at least
> > changeset to JDK 8, either directly or indirectly, then in JDK 9 you
> > be granted the highest of the roles that you hold amongst those
> There are a number of Contributors in hsx that are not yet Committers
> or Reviewers, but that are well along the way to earning those roles.
> I hope that changes already contributed to hsx will count toward
> achieving Committer and Reviewer status in jdk9.

History gets carried over, so this shouldn't be a problem, otherwise we
would all be resetted at every major update.

I think the bylaws is pretty clear that experiences toward roles can be
carried over, since is not stated otherwise:

"An OpenJDK Member is a Contributor who has demonstrated a history of
significant contributions to the Community as recognized by a vote of the
existing OpenJDK Members".

"A Committer to a Project is an Author who has been granted direct push
access to the Project’s code repositories".

"A Reviewer for a Project is an experienced Committer who has the authority
to approve changesets destined for code repositories designated by the
Project Lead as requiring formal change review".

In other words, is up to a committer/member/lead/Oracle to propose a new
committer/member/lead, but it's not stated regarding the specific of the
merits, which are instead a common sense definition based on the whole
history of collaboration.


More information about the jdk9-dev mailing list