[aarch64-port-dev ] Tracking aarch64 downstream backports

[Aleksey Shipilev]

On 4/30/19 4:57 PM, Andrew Haley wrote:
> On 4/30/19 10:14 AM, Aleksey Shipilev wrote:
>> ...I think the important part here is "aarch64", not "shenandoah". So, maybe the version tag should
>> be "8-aarch64". And, given there is only a single active tree in aarch64, it would be unambiguous.
>> It would be awkward to mark AArch64-specific bugs with 8-shenandoah, when those issues are not
>> related to Shenandoah at all, but rather relate to 8u aarch64 port.
> 
> Well, yes, OK. So there will be 8u-aarch64 and 8u-shenandoah versions,
> destined for the same tree. A merge is looking more and more attractive.

Yes. 8-aarch64 and 8-shenandoah properly reflect the current reality of two separate trees.

-Aleksey