Project Proposal: Build Infrastructure Changes

[Steve Poole]

On 26/04/11 00:36, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
> On Apr 24, 2011, at 12:17 PM, Lussier, Denis wrote:
>
>> My two cents are:
>>
>> I think this is great.  To say the least, it has historically been
>> challenging and/or non-standard to build OpenJDK (most especially on
>> Windoze).
Kelly, a big +1 for this proposal  (is that a +2 or a ++1 ? ) - I'll 
definitely help as much as I can - especially with support for AIX and 
other stranger IBM platforms :-)
> Keep in mind, that our goals did not include meeting anyone's standards, there are
> just too many of them, and often they leave out something critical to what we need
> for a project that builds on so many platforms/compilers/etc.
>
>> I think first impressions when building a project are very important.
> I agree.
>
>> People can become quickly enthused (and stay with it to become a long
>> term contributor) OR they go away and incorrectly assume OpenJDK isn't
>> really open.
> I'm concerned that your definition of "open" means we must  strictly follow a style or
> pre-defined template for building.
> We want to explore some techniques, some new, some old, that could be a big win
> to building in record time, so we may need to color outside the lines for a while.
>
For me being open is simple:  the build process is  "open"  if it 
doesn't require proprietary or hidden tools.  In some cases that rule 
gets broken where there is no free alternative to a critical tool but 
that should be the only (and rare) exception.

> -kto
>