Adding Microbenchmarks to the JDK forest/trees (JEP-230)

Magnus Ihse Bursie magnus.ihse.bursie at
Wed Dec 3 10:58:44 UTC 2014

On 2014-12-02 23:45, Christian Thalinger wrote:
>> On Dec 2, 2014, at 2:40 PM, Jonathan Gibbons <jonathan.gibbons at> wrote:
>> Staffan,
>> That seems to put it on the low end for reasonably being its own repo, if you wanted that, at least, as indicated by the numbers.
> Do we really want more repositories?
As long as the number of repositories are around a dozen, one more or 
less does not really matter. But our model will probably not scale well 
with hundreds of repos (e.g. if someone would suggest that every module 
should reside in a separate repo).

My suggestion is that the microbenchmarks are put in the top-level repo, 
if only for the reason that it seems fully possible to split them out to 
a separate repo some time in the future if it grows too much, but it 
seems much more unlikely that it will ever be moved back into the 
top-level repo if we realized it was a stupid idea to put it in a 
separate repo.


More information about the build-dev mailing list