Right. If you wanted to revive the unofficial OpenJFX bitbucket mirror
for your own experiments, that is certainly something you could do
(subject to the GPLv2 + CLASSPATH license terms).
For those patches to then be incorporated into the openjfx repos on
hg.openjdk.java.net they need to go through the existing openjdk
mechanism (which requires a signed OCA) as patches / webrevs, just like
any other openjdk project. We cannot take patches directly from a
BitBucket repo.
-- Kevin
Jonathan Giles wrote:
There was a mirror, but it was unofficial and one-way (OpenJDK ->
BitBucket). I believe (although my memory may be failing me) that it
was operated by Danno, so he might have more to say.
In regards to fork / pull-request vs patch-file, I have no arguments
there. Of course, OpenJFX is part of the OpenJDK, and therefore makes
use of the OpenJDK infrastructure. My main point is that any movement
regarding infrastructure is guided by an over-arching infrastructure
team, in conjunction with the OpenJDK masters. OpenJFX can't work
independent of this.
-- Jonathan
On 18/03/2015 10:50 a.m., Florian Brunner wrote:
Hi,
AFAIK there is/ was a mirror of OpenJFX at BitBucket.
I think the URL was https://bitbucket.org/openjfxmirrors, but it's
not valid
anymore.
Is there still a mirror of OpenJFX at BitBucket?
A fork/pull-request workflow is state-of-the-art nowadays in software
development and way better than a patch-file based workflow IMHO.
It would be great to have such a fork/pull-request workflow also for
OpenJFX!
-Florian
