Producing community binaries for OpenJDK

[Tim Ellison]

Realistically it will take me longer than 24hrs to submit the internal
paperwork for pushing the build scripts out, but I hope to have that
done approx. mid-week.  I'm going to push our code to Git under ALv2.

The repo names in the Git AdoptOpenJDK org don't seem to follow any
naming convention ;-)
I'd like to end up with:
  foo-jdk8u    = openjdk source mirror
  foo-build    = build scripts
  foo-nightly  = location of nightly builds
  foo-releases = location for releases
  foo-website  = website source/host

Suggestions for the 'foo' prefix welcome.  We'd also need write access
in those too!

Regards,
Tim

On 10/03/17 13:40, Ben Evans wrote:
> I haven't heard anyone expressing any reservations about moving Tim's
> repos to AdoptOpenJDK - so shall we give it another 24 hours, see if
> anyone speaks up, and if we don't hear anything, just do it?
> 
> Rough consensus and running code, and all that?
> 
> Ben
> 
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 12:59 PM, Mike Burton <mikeb at mycosystems.co.uk> wrote:
>> Hi Tim,
>>
>> I really like the sound of this, and moving your repos into https
://github.com/adoptopenjdk would be great. Just checked and I dont have
write perm on it but other AdoptOpenJDK folk do.
>>
>> Best Regards
>>
>> Mike Burton
>>
>>
>>
>>> On 10 Mar 2017, at 12:26, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> 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.
>>>>
>>