Builds and webrevs

David Simms david.simms at oracle.com
Fri Nov 2 14:11:39 UTC 2018


On 2/11/18 2:43 PM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
> On 11/02/2018 02:34 PM, David Simms wrote:
>>>> The "lworld" and "lw1" seem to be very far behind current jdk/jdk. Is this deliberate? If so, what
>>>> would be the repository/revision to diff them against? If not so, are there plans to get them up to
>>>> speed?
>> "lw1" is a dead release branch
> Okay, good to know! Removed it from scheduled webrev.
>
>> "lworld" - a pivot from lw1 to lw2 is underway, this is why the "lworld_stable" tag was added. Trail
>> behind jdk/jdk is a little long now, but I don't want to disturb initial lw2. We will sync with jdk
>> again once initial lw2 is going (soon, next week or two), and we can move the "lworld_stable"
>> tag...so maybe wait until that happens ?
> Meh. The goal for my CI is to build (and find failures) in bleeding edge versions, so I shall
> continue building and webreving the "lworld" head. Once it catches up with jdk/jdk, webrev would
> start to make more sense.
>
> Our Shenandoah experience forced us to do pulls and merges early and often, as gigantic merges with
> jdk/jdk prove to be very exhausting and error-prone if we allow upstream changes to accumulate. For
> webrevs, not pulling recent jdk/jdk to "default" in valhalla/valhalla would be nice. This would
> probably throw "nestmates" branch under the bus though, hm.
>
> -Aleksey
>

I'm hearing you. I too would like to keep a little more up-to-date, and 
after those initial lw2 changes, it will probably be weekly (Thursdays).

/D




More information about the valhalla-dev mailing list