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
Windoze).
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.
-kto
