Missing webrev features ( was Re: RFR: JDK-8027836 Webrev script breaks for files that has been moved from a directory which now is also removed)

[Jonathan Gibbons]

On 11/11/2013 02:20 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
> On 2013-11-08 16:54, Jonathan Gibbons wrote:
>> On 11/08/2013 12:22 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>>> If we can achieve both the goal of moving the webrev script away 
>>> from being tied to a specific jdk repo, and still let everyone keep 
>>> their scripts/command lines/etc intact, I can't see the harm in 
>>> that. It's no big deal forcing people to clone yet another repo to 
>>> use webrev, but on the other hand, it's no big deal to make this 
>>> change completely transparant as well -- and then I'd prefer the 
>>> latter.
>>
>>
>> I have no problem with another code-tools repo, but it does raise the 
>> question of how folk should get tools provided in the such repos. I 
>> presume you would not suggest that if someone wants to use jtreg, 
>> some script should automagically download and build jtreg. What about 
>> jcheck?  If someone wants to use jcheck locally, should the OpenJDK 
>> forest provide a script to download and install jcheck somewhere?
>
> Actually, why could you not have a script to download and build jtreg? 
> I get the feeling you want to provide a reductio ad absurdum, but for 
> me, that is not absurd. In fact, that is the direction the new build 
> system has been going all the time. Providing a configure step, which 
> finds what is available, and suggests command lines for getting what 
> is missing, is the first step. Further along, we still want to provide 
> the "build deps" solution -- where the tools needed to build the JDK 
> can be automatically downloaded and installed. Sure, this is not 
> trivial (that's why it's not implemented yet), but that does not mean 
> it's not a worthy goal.
>
> If we had an existing build-deps infrastructure, it would be a 
> no-brainer to add webrev (or jtreg) to it. But we do not have it, yet. 
> So, does that mean we should not try to download anything, or should 
> we try some tools without have a solution for everything. I'd vote for 
> the latter.
>
> /Magnus

Making it easier to get a copy of jtreg and other tools, is a worthy 
goal, and may even involve building those tools when necessary. But, I 
don't think it is sensible to clone "additional" repos into an OpenJDK 
forest.  Earlier, this thread started because you didn't want to break 
existing scripts, but you are as likely to break other scripts if you 
start cloning repos from other projects anywhere under the root of an 
OpenJDK forest.

Furthermore, whilst I accept that some folk prefer to build from all 
source on up, others may prefer to access and use prebuilt binaries when 
available.

-- Jon