On Thu, 17 Mar 2022 00:12:38 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 incrementally with one > additional commit since the last revision: > > Fix typos Thanks for dropping the charset and locale data from the proposal. The updated proposal (b1d1e4d8) looks okay but I can't tell if you are planning to integrate this or wait until there is discussion on the locations proposed in the Informational JEP that you've just submitted. Maybe you plan to just integrate and then adjust/move again if needed? I suspect that JEP will need to includes a "specs" directory. It's okay to jdwp.spec into the java.se "data" directory for now I think "specs" would be a bette place for it. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/1611
