Producing community binaries for OpenJDK

[Tim Ellison]

On 09/03/17 17:43, Ben Evans wrote:
> This sounds good to me - and I think it's the kind of thing that Adopt
> would very much be interested in.

That's good to hear.

> I'm looping in adoption-discuss, AdoptOpenJDK and Martijn, as I'm not
> sure how many other folk are reading openjdk-binary.

I'm happy to narrow it down to whatever list(s) are the most appropriate
once there is consensus on a home for this.

> Adoption folk - what do we think? Does this fit under the existing structure?
> 
> Tim - assuming that it does, what practical things can AdoptOpenJDK do
> to help you?

Not much at this stage, just a friendly place to talk about such stuff,
and agreement on a natural place to put the work in progress.  Being
able to move our repos into the AdoptOpenJDK org [1] would be nice.

[1] https://github.com/adoptopenjdk

Regards,
Tim

> Thanks,
> 
> Ben
> 
> On Thu, Mar 9, 2017 at 4:15 PM, Tim Ellison <Tim_Ellison at uk.ibm.com> wrote:
>> I've now got some cycles for actually doing some build work around OpenJDK.
>> There are a couple of colleagues here at IBM who can also contribute to the
>> build process.
>>
>> It seems that the closest starting point for community build/test is the
>> fine work that was done as part of the Adopt OpenJDK project; though it
>> looks like that has been quiet for a while?
>>
>> So we have started "from scratch" this week and are writing some build
>> scripts we'd like to move into the open and share with folks.  It will start
>> simple, building Linux x86_64 and rolling out to Mac, PPC, and Windows.
>> Likewise starting with some JTReg testing, and building that out to more
>> meaningful tests.  We like Git, so it's currently housed in a private Git
>> repo.
>>
>> The goal is to have a continuous integration system pulling from OpenJDK and
>> producing community binaries that are built using a fully open build system,
>> so everyone can validate how it was created, and the dependencies and
>> patches that it includes, etc.  Of course, the idea is that changes that are
>> relevant to OpenJDK source end up back there; but there will always be build
>> specific-files, and point-in-time patches required to produce a working
>> binary.
>>
>> If there is enough flexibility at the Adopt OpenJDK project, I'd prefer to
>> push the code there and continue working under that organization; but
>> understand if that project would prefer we set up our own space elsewhere.
>>
>> Just to be clear, I'm not proposing to open up IBM's Java build system
>> (believe me, you wouldn't want to have that!); it's much simpler than that
>> -- just a CI clone/build/test/publish cycle, and then see where things go
>> from there.
>>
>> Thoughts?
>> Tim
>> Unless stated otherwise above:
>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
>> 741598.
>> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "OpenJDK Binary Gateway" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to openjdk-binary-gateway+unsubscribe at googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to
>> openjdk-binary-gateway at googlegroups.com.
>> To view this discussion on the web, visit
>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openjdk-binary-gateway/OFD8B8A2C3.73C69040-ON802580DE.004DB23A-802580DE.00594BDE%40notes.na.collabserv.com.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>