Producing community binaries for OpenJDK

Wed Mar 22 06:58:59 UTC 2017

I'm also open to archiving / publicising the entire Slack channel as
well, certainly not interesting in hiding anything! We just need(ed) a
real-time IM client to get stuff done quickly and for better or for
worse Slack is the dominant useful tool in this space.

I guess IRC faces the same issue in that not everyone can access it
during the day from work?
Cheers,
Martijn

On 22 March 2017 at 04:16, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 21/03/17 21:26, Mario Torre wrote:
>> Hi Martijn,
>>
>> I'm still a bit confused what this project is trying to do, can you
>> (or someone else) write a quick summary?
>
> I appreciate you asked Martijn, but let me add my 2c.
>
> It came about following a discussion about the general lack of an open
> and reproducible build & test system for the OpenJDK source across
> multiple platforms.  Practically, it's a reboot of the work that has
> already been done for a while in this project producing binaries for
> developers and end users.
>
> There may be some areas of overlap with other past/present efforts, but
> that's ok IMHO.  I expect any duplication to converge in due course.
>
>> Also, perhaps Slack is convenient, but it feels a bit hidden (click
>> through, pm to obtain secrets links, etc...). If this work is
>> producing something that is useful for the OpenJDK community then
>> perhaps the discussion should happen in the open, or at least backed
>> by a wiki page or something?
>
> Slack contains general chatter like "I just sent 'bob' the password we
> need", or me being grumpy about stuff.  It's not worth preserving in an
> archive!
>
> More interesting discussions will take place here, or via the Github
> issues; and consensus recorded on this project website/wiki or the repo
> wiki as appropriate.
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
>> Cheers,
>> Mario
>>
>> 2017-03-21 22:20 GMT+01:00 Martijn Verburg <martijnverburg at gmail.com>:
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> We've made a good chunk of progress on this.  If anyone wants to join
>>> the Slack channel where the developers are currently co-ordinating
>>> then please send me a message directly.
>>>
>>> There's a few bugs to iron out and some clearer wording to be added
>>> but we should have a version out for review in the next week or so.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Martijn
>>>
>>>
>>> On 17 March 2017 at 13:22, Martijn Verburg <martijnverburg at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi George/All,
>>>>
>>>> I've submitted a PR for the nightly build README.  LMK what you think
>>>> in terms of it's tone and message.  If we have a rough consensus then
>>>> I can write up similar READMEs for the other repositories.
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Martijn
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 17 March 2017 at 09:36, Martijn Verburg <martijnverburg at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> The five repositories have been created and I've added the team George
>>>>> created as admins to all of them.
>>>>>
>>>>> @George I assume you'll be wanting jdk9 and jdk10 repos as well, let
>>>>> me know if you want me to create those.
>>>>>
>>>>> I guess we'll see what the first code drops look like and then
>>>>> re-organise from there.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the meantime I think Mani and I need to take a look at the
>>>>> Cloudbees situation.  If there are any other Cloudbees/Jenkins experts
>>>>> then please let me know and I'll put a Hangout together to determine
>>>>> if Cloudbees is still viable or what requests we need to make of them.
>>>>>
>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>> Martijn
>>>>>
>>>>> On 16 March 2017 at 19:07, george.adams <george.adams at uk.ibm.com> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> thanks for adding our github ID's to the organization. I have gone ahead and
>>>>>> created a team so that our group can easily be CC'd in issues and also makes
>>>>>> repo permissions much easier. Could you go ahead and create the repos
>>>>>> requested by Tim and as we are unable to transfer the repositories until we
>>>>>> have contributor access to your end too
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks George
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Friday, March 10, 2017 at 4:20:04 PM UTC, Martijn Verburg wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Apologies for coming late to the thread.  Totally happy with the
>>>>>>> AdoptOpenJDK github being used as a starting point.  Please not e we
>>>>>>> also have an AdoptOpenJDK org at bitbucket if people just wanted to
>>>>>>> use hg (although it sounds like not)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think we call foo openjdk or adoptopendjk - I'm not too fussed
>>>>>>> although I think openjdk clearly states what it is, so:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> openjdk-jdk8u       = openjdk source mirror
>>>>>>> openjdk-build        = build scripts
>>>>>>> openjdk-nightly     = location of nightly builds
>>>>>>> openjdk-releases  = location for releases
>>>>>>> openjdk-website   = website source/host
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As it's the AdoptOpenJDK org it should be more than clear enough that
>>>>>>> this is a community enthusiasts effort but not an official
>>>>>>> openjdk.java.net effort (which may or may not come later).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I can add various folks to the GitHub org and give them permissions to
>>>>>>> add repos.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Please email me your (or their) github ids and lets get going.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>>> Martijn
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10 March 2017 at 14:59, Tim Ellison <t.p.e... at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 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 <mi... 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.e... 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_E... 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-bin... 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.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> 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 an email to openjdk-bin... at googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>>> To view this discussion on the web, visit
>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/openjdk-binary-gateway/bbecbb8d-7a59-c2f2-a85b-ddb09d4a86fb%40gmail.com.
>>>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> 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/d547005b-3027-42bd-a90f-bf09d25049b2%40googlegroups.com.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
>>
>>
>>