On 9/13/11 6:11 AM, Erik Trimble wrote: > On 9/12/2011 2:35 PM, Dalibor Topic wrote: >> Hi, >> >> it's time to discuss the repository structure for 7u2 in phase 2 (aka >> stabilization), where only high priority >> fixes are allowed, as mentioned in our Repository Management Rule 3. [0] >> >> With this mail, I'd like to propose that we create only one, master, forest >> for OpenJDK 7u2 in phase 2, >> since we should expect only a small number of fixes to be acceptable for >> phase 2, and no integration forest. >> >> So, for this Project, I'd like to see us add the following repository: >> >> * http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7u/jdk7u2 - 7u2 phase 2 OpenJDK master >> >> to be populated from hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7u/jdk7u OpenJDK JDK 7 Updates >> mainline >> >> Phase 2 changes on code in OpenJDK would go here first, and get synced by >> the integrator to the jdk7u OpenJDK JDK 7 Updates mainline. >> >> Note: there is no separate integration forest in OpenJDK for 7u2 phase 2. >> >> Let me know if you have comments on this proposal on this mailing list by >> Wednesday. >> >> Finally, thanks to Abhijit Saha and Edvard Wendelin for their work on >> creating and reviewing this proposal. >> >> cheers, >> dalibor topic >> >> [0] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk7u/repos.html > > Honestly, I think the only thing that people should be aware of is that > syncing from 7uN back into 7u on a fix-by-fix basis (rather than at the end > of the 7uN cycle, or even after every 7uN build) results in a bit of muddy > history inside the 7u repository. > > I'm not saying this is bad (or, frankly, even avoidable), but just be aware > that the HISTORY for 7uN and 7u will not line up nicely, which means that for > subsequent 7uN+2 (or whatever) release, the history ISN'T going to line up > nicely as 7uN + another whole number of fixes. It's going to be 7u (at the > time of the 7uN fork), plus the 7uN and 7u-only fixes interspersed. > > About the only way I could see avoiding this is to wait until a 7uN release > is finished, then (and ONLY then) sync back into the 7u line, using the > 'rebase' option. I find this option significantly worse than the proposed > method, for obvious reasons. > > I also second the existence of a Master-only (no Integration) forest for the > 7uN releases. The number of fixes is limited, and the extra Integration > forest really buys us no additional benefit. >
Thanks for the feedback, Erik - we'll go with this structure for 7u2 phase 2 then. cheers, dalibor topic -- Oracle <http://www.oracle.com> Dalibor Topic | Java F/OSS Ambassador Phone: +494023646738 <tel:+494023646738> | Mobile: +491772664192 <tel:+491772664192> Oracle Java Platform Group ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Nagelsweg 55 | 20097 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 München Registergericht: Amtsgericht München, HRA 95603 Komplementärin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Geschäftsführer: Jürgen Kunz, Marcel van de Molen, Alexander van der Ven Green Oracle <http://www.oracle.com/commitment> Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment
