On Apr 26, 2011, at 12:57 AM, Steve Poole wrote: >>> >>> 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.
No hidden tools. But it is impossible for us to avoid using any proprietary OS or compiler. -kto
