// Forwarding John Duimovich’s vote for the record. // His HTML-only e-mail message was rejected by the mail system.
2019/11/15 7:16:13 -0800, john_duimov...@ca.ibm.com: > From: John Duimovich <john_duimov...@ca.ibm.com> > To: mark.reinh...@oracle.com > Cc: gb-discuss@openjdk.java.net, maurizio.cimadam...@oracle.com > Subject: Re: CFV: New Group: IDE & Tooling Support > Flags: seen > Date: Fri 2019/11/15 07:16:13 -0800 > Maildir: / > Tags: spam-maybe > > Vote: yes > > John > ----- Original message ----- > From: mark.reinh...@oracle.com > Sent by: "gb-discuss" <gb-discuss-boun...@openjdk.java.net> > To: gb-discuss@openjdk.java.net > Cc: maurizio.cimadam...@oracle.com > Subject: [EXTERNAL] CFV: New Group: IDE & Tooling Support > Date: Fri, Nov 8, 2019 5:30 PM > > On behalf of Maurizio Cimadamore I hereby propose creation of > the > "IDE & Tooling Support" Group, with Maurizio as the initial > Lead. > > Maurizio’s proposal: > > At the last OpenJDK Committer Workshop in Brussels, we > agreed to set > up some channel in which to discuss issues related to > OpenJDK tooling > and, more specifically, IDE support. We already have pretty > comprehensive support for OpenJDK development in both > IntelliJ and > Netbeans, but the main, long standing problem has been one > of lack of > adequate communication and coordination between these > various efforts, > which often led (frustrated) developers to the path of "I'll > write my > own support". > > The goal of this group is, first and foremost, to > extensively document > the alternatives that are already available at present, as > well as to > capture discussions related to tooling support which are > currently > scattered among many mailing list (compiler-dev, jtreg-dev, > build-dev). After some discussion [3], it feels like > proposing a > group is the right thing to do because: (i) a group > automatically gets > a mailing list and a page on openjdk.java.net -- which can > be useful > for communicating within the group and also for publishing > the much > needed documentation; also (ii) a group is not tied to any > specific > set of deliverables (unlike, say, an OpenJDK Project), which > feels > right in this case, as IDE support is likely to be a > recurring > activity. > > We want the OpenJDK Community to be a welcoming place for > developers, > and I feel that improving IDE/tooling support plays a > crucial role in > reducing the activation energy required to start hacking on > the JDK > codebase. > > I'm proposing to lead the Group given the extensive work > I've done in > the area of improving the usability of various IDE products > for JDK > development. I've started this work 10 years ago by adding > support > for a standalone project to work on langtools with the > Netbeans IDE; > this work then continued when I created, together with Chris > Hegarty, > a way to generate JDK-wide IntelliJ projects, given a set of > JDK > modules the developer wants to work with. Finally, I've also > behind > the effort to improve the support for jtreg inside the > Intellij IDE. > > I propose the following list of initial members: > > Chris Hegarty (Oracle) > Jan Lahoda (Oracle) > Jonathan Gibbons (Oracle) > Robin Westberg (Oracle) > Magnus Ihse Bursie (Oracle) > > Only current Governing Board Members[1] are eligible to vote > on this > motion. Votes must be cast in the open by replying to this > mailing > list. > > Votes are due by 23:00 UTC next Friday, 15 November. > > For Simple Majority voting instructions, see [2]. > > My apologies for the long delay in forwarding this proposal. > > - Mark > > [1] http://openjdk.java.net/census#gb > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/groups/#new-group-vote > [3] https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/discuss/2019- > March/004983.html
