Project Proposal: Build Infrastructure Changes
spoole at linux.vnet.ibm.com
Tue Apr 26 07:57:29 UTC 2011
On 26/04/11 00:36, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
> On Apr 24, 2011, at 12:17 PM, Lussier, Denis wrote:
>> My two cents are:
>> I think this is great. To say the least, it has historically been
>> challenging and/or non-standard to build OpenJDK (most especially on
Kelly, a big +1 for this proposal (is that a +2 or a ++1 ? ) - I'll
definitely help as much as I can - especially with support for AIX and
other stranger IBM platforms :-)
> Keep in mind, that our goals did not include meeting anyone's standards, there are
> just too many of them, and often they leave out something critical to what we need
> for a project that builds on so many platforms/compilers/etc.
>> I think first impressions when building a project are very important.
> I agree.
>> People can become quickly enthused (and stay with it to become a long
>> term contributor) OR they go away and incorrectly assume OpenJDK isn't
>> really open.
> I'm concerned that your definition of "open" means we must strictly follow a style or
> pre-defined template for building.
> We want to explore some techniques, some new, some old, that could be a big win
> to building in record time, so we may need to color outside the lines for a while.
For me being open is simple: the build process is "open" if it
doesn't require proprietary or hidden tools. In some cases that rule
gets broken where there is no free alternative to a critical tool but
that should be the only (and rare) exception.
More information about the build-dev