Doh!  Of course...  I only had my Java hat on and forgot about the other
supported runtimes.  Thanks for the re-explanation, Mark.

*>  **I wonder: would the fact that these projects are both Eclipse
projects (again, thinking positively since OpenJ9 hasn't yet passed its
creation review!) help with the IP concerns?*

You would think so, but that's a question for the EMO...  I certainly agree
with your original issue -- you don't want to be submitting CQs on a
continual delivery basis.  Unless you could bake the creation of the
appropriate CQ into your Jenkins build process.  JK!  :-)

-- Kevin

On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 3:30 PM, Mark Stoodley <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Kevin,
>
> > Is there any reason why these two projects need to be independent
> Eclipse projects?
>
> The Eclipse OMR project has components that can be used to build any kind
> of language runtime (currently we have Java, Javascript, Lua, Swift, Ruby,
> Smalltalk, Rosie Pattern Language, and some "example" projects that are
> based on the Eclipse OMR project).
>
> OpenJ9 is "just" the Java-specific code that uses Eclipse OMR (though it's
> also the most comprehensive consumer of OMR and the original source for the
> components in the Eclipse OMR project).
>
> So, while the two projects are "pretty tight" and we want OpenJ9 to
> aggressively leverage advances made in OMR, the two projects are really
> separate entities with very different goals and different communities.
>
> I wonder: would the fact that these projects are both Eclipse projects
> (again, thinking positively since OpenJ9 hasn't yet passed its creation
> review!) help with the IP concerns?
> ------------------------------
> *Mark Stoodley*  8200 Warden Avenue
> Senior Software Developer  Markham, L6G 1C7
> IBM Runtime Technologies  Canada
> Phone: +1-905-413-5831 <(905)%20413-5831>
> e-mail: [email protected]
> ------------------------------
> We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we
> created them - Albert Einstein
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From:        Kevin Sutter <[email protected]>
> To:        Discussions for new Eclipse projects <[email protected]>
> Date:        2017/07/27 04:17 PM
> Subject:        Re: [incubation] continuous integration of another
> Eclipse        project...
> Sent by:        [email protected]
> ------------------------------
>
>
>
> Mark,
> Is there any reason why these two projects need to be independent Eclipse
> projects?  Could a single Eclipse project encompass both efforts, with each
> component (openj9 and omr) just be separate efforts with separate
> repositories?  From your description, it sounds like these two "projects"
> are pretty tight.  Just wondering why they need to be separate.
>
> Even if these components exist within a single project, each component
> could still release it's own artifacts and versions.  For example, if OMR
> still wants to produce independent releases, they could do that.  And, then
> have those results feed into the openj9 component or project.
>
> We're doing a sort-of similar thing with the MicroProfile project.  We
> have several components within MicroProfile, each with it's own release
> cycle -- Config API, Fault Tolerance API, JWT RBAC propogation,
> OpenTracing, etc.  And, then the results of these independent efforts will
> feed into the overall MicroProfile releases.
>
> --  Kevin
>
> On Thu, Jul 27, 2017 at 2:25 PM, Mark Stoodley <*[email protected]*
> <[email protected]>> wrote:
> The OpenJ9 project proposal is in its creation review at this point (
> *https://projects.eclipse.org/proposals/eclipse-openj9*
> <https://projects.eclipse.org/proposals/eclipse-openj9>). This project
> will be consuming the Eclipse OMR project on a regular (actually,
> continuous, is what we would like) basis. These two projects are quite
> closely linked (in that Eclipse OMR provides Virtual Machine technology
> components, like garbage collection and JIT compilers, that are then
> "specialized" by OpenJ9 to implement a Java Virtual Machine).
>
> What we're imagining is that OpenJ9 will maintain its own private "fork"
> of Eclipse OMR (an openj9.omr repository alongside the primary openj9
> repository we're optimistically expecting to be created at GitHub) that we
> want to mirror commits from the upstream Eclipse OMR project when they
> happen. We really do think we want to be at the bleeding edge on both
> projects at the same time (because life isn't challenging enough, I guess).
> One motivating reason for that is so that OpenJ9 can immediately test and
> react to the impact of Eclipse OMR commits in the context of a Java Virtual
> Machine (i.e. leveraging tests written in Java).
>
> I'm wondering primarily how this kind of consumption model should interact
> with the CQs one normally files when the "version" of a dependent project
> is being updated: if OpenJ9 pulls in every Eclipse OMR commit, which could
> mean up to 40+ commits per week, I'm *really* *really* hoping that will not
> require a CQ each. Another possibly relevant wrinkle is that, despite lots
> of activity, Eclipse OMR hasn't done a release yet (yeah, we're proud :( ).
>
> Does any other project do this kind of thing already?
>
> Any advice or, especially, feedback on how we can pragmatically use this
> kind of model and meet our IP tracking requirements?
>
> Is there anything Eclipse OMR needs to do to facilitate this consumption
> model, and is there anything we need to ensure in the construction of
> OpenJ9 (or its private fork of OMR) to make this work and be practical?
>
> --mark
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> incubation mailing list
> *[email protected]* <[email protected]>
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
> from this list, visit
> *https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/incubation*
> <https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/incubation>
>
> _______________________________________________
> incubation mailing list
> [email protected]
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
> from this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/incubation
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> incubation mailing list
> [email protected]
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe
> from this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/incubation
>
>
_______________________________________________
incubation mailing list
[email protected]
To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from 
this list, visit
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/incubation

Reply via email to