On Tue, 27 Oct 2020 06:35:33 GMT, Aleksey Shipilev <[email protected]> wrote:

>>> > My rationale is simple: I am playing the whack-a-mole against the ongoing 
>>> > x86_32 regressions here
>>> 
>>> Would it be possible that we add a Travis hook so that commits get tested 
>>> once before they are merged?
>> 
>> Maybe, but that would be beyond the scope of this PR. These GH actions 
>> workflows go the long way already to make pre-integration tests, and they 
>> already run and used by OpenJDK contributors. I see immediate value in 
>> improving GH workflows, and see no clear estimate how much work would be 
>> involved in hooking up Travis, and what the project-wide consequences would 
>> be. If you want, open a new bug, prototype the change, discuss it there, and 
>> see if that is an acceptable thing to do.
>
> Let me coop this PR to rename x32 -> x86, among other cosmetic changes. Once 
> #830 lands, I'll update x32 -> x86 in those new blocks as well. This way, we 
> can have best of both worlds: x86_32 would start testing, and we would do the 
> follow-ups here.

> @shipilev I realize you are eager to have Github run automatic testing on 
> platforms that you care about, but it's not like it's a regression that needs 
> to be taken care of immediately. I strongly prefer to have a correct solution 
> implemented once, before committing, than this piece-meal splitting of what's 
> actually a single issue into three different PRs.

I very much care that the in-flight PRs (notably #505 and #548) would get their 
x86_32 testing early, hopefully before their integration. Because, having the 
same argument here, I strongly prefer to have a correct solution implemented 
once for the *actual product code*. I believe the choice between "making the 
test code sparkling clean in one go" and "making the product code sparking 
clean in one go" is obvious.

> Now, the first one has already gone in, so not much to do about that, but I 
> strongly believe that this and JDK-8255305 should be folded together in a 
> single issue.

I disagree. These changes are logically independent. #830 adds testing step, it 
is self-sufficient, already tested, and already in review. This one cleans up 
cosmetics, is relatively new, has a potential to accumulate other followups, 
and thus risks to drag on. Let's do the MVP in #830, and then do everything 
else.

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/869

Reply via email to