Initial forests for JDK 9

Joseph Darcy joe.darcy at
Thu Dec 12 15:09:06 PST 2013

On 12/12/2013 2:54 PM, Stuart Marks wrote:
> On 12/12/13 12:20 PM, Iris Clark wrote:
>> Based on where the notifications for jdk8 go, these are the default 
>> "Reply-to" values for each of the new mailing lists:
>>    jdk9-changes: jdk9-dev
>>    jdk9-dev-changes: compiler-dev, core-libs-dev, serviceability-dev, 
>> net-dev, build-dev
>>    jdk9-client-changes: 2d-dev, awt-dev, swing-dev
>>    jdk9-hs-changes: hotspot-dev
>>    jdk9-hs-comp-changes: hotspot-compiler-dev
>>    jdk9-hs-emb-changes: hotspot-runtime-dev
>>    jdk9-hs-gc-changes: hotspot-gc-dev
>>    jdk9-hs-rt-changes: hotspot-runtime-dev, serviceability-dev
> Seems sensible to me, modulo resolution of the embedded notification 
> issue being discussed on the rest of this thread.
> Now wait... is there a jdk9-changes list that will receive change 
> notifications for the jdk9 master forest? Because Mark had said earlier,
>> I think the master forest is the exception.  Everyone working on the
>> release should be aware of changes to the master, so notifications
>> for that forest should go to jdk9-dev, just as notifications for the
>> JDK 8 master went to jdk8-dev.
> According to that, there would be no jdk9-changes list, and change 
> notifications for master would go directly to jdk9-dev. (And 
> presumably replies as well.)
> I don't particularly care whether the notification list for changes to 
> master is called jdk9-changes or jdk9-master changes. I'd like for 
> there to be one separate from the jdk9-dev discussion list. In my 
> opinion, mixing in the change notifications just clutters up the 
> discussion list.

FWIW, I would also prefer if the jdk9-dev list were only for discussions 
and for all push notifications to go to a separate list. However, it may 
be helpful to have a coarser grained notification like "an integration 
has occurred" notice being sent to the dev list.


More information about the jdk9-dev mailing list