Producing community binaries for OpenJDK

Wed Mar 22 09:47:16 UTC 2017

I've raised an issue on the Github project for this and will investigate today.
Cheers,
Martijn

On 22 March 2017 at 06:58, Martijn Verburg <martijnverburg at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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.
>>>
>>>
>>>