On Mon, 21 Mar 2022 16:29:25 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <i...@openjdk.org> wrote:
>> A lot (but not all) of the data in make/data is tied to a specific module. >> For instance, the publicsuffixlist is used by java.base, and fontconfig by >> java.desktop. (A few directories, like mainmanifest, is *actually* used by >> make for the whole build.) >> >> These data files should move to the module they belong to. The are, after >> all, "source code" for that module that is "compiler" into resulting >> deliverables, for that module. (But the "source code" language is not Java >> or C, but typically a highly domain specific language or data format, and >> the "compilation" is, often, a specialized transformation.) >> >> This misplacement of the data directory is most visible at code review time. >> When such data is changed, most of the time build-dev (or the new build >> label) is involved, even though this has nothing to do with the build. While >> this is annoying, a worse problem is if the actual team that needs to review >> the patch (i.e., the team owning the module) is missed in the review. >> >> ### Modules reviewed >> >> - [x] java.base >> - [x] java.desktop >> - [x] jdk.compiler >> - [x] java.se > > Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request with a new target base due to > a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 20 commits: > > - Merge branch 'master' into shuffle-data > - Correct name for bfc files > - Merge tag 'jdk-19+14' into shuffle-data > > Added tag jdk-19+14 for changeset 08cadb47 > - Move x11wrappergen from share/data to unix/data > - Fix fontconfig according to review request > - Fix typos > - Restore charsetmapping and cldr to make/data > - Update copyright year > - Merge branch 'master' into shuffle-data-reborn > - Fix merge > - ... and 10 more: > https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/19d34bdf...1c47d82d As before, the changes for `jdk.compiler` and `idk.javadoc` look OK, and if there is general consensus on the overall proposed move, then I think that overall it is a good idea. I did not review the `jdk.compiler` in low-level detail, but scanning the webrev index file, the changes seemed OK, and a pure move (no lines changed.) It might have been better to have handled this on a per-module basis, rather than all-at-once, but whatever ... ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/1611
