Status on OpenJDK Build Infrastructure Project

[Alan Bateman]

On 20/12/2012 18:29, Kelly O'Hair wrote:
> :
>
> sjavac is not and has not been a hard requirement for the build-infra cutover,  sjavac status questions should be sent to
> to the langtools group. The use of sjavac is a configuration option, defaulted to off right now.
> Once it is working well, we are prepared to change our default configuration to use it, but we have to limit the complications
> here before the cutover, and sjavac is a complication.
> Developers can configure to use sjavac on their own, so we are not preventing it's use.
>
> This cutover is being done around RE's needs, and we are purposely not addressing all the developer issues before
> the cutover. I know this is not ideal, but the pressure to get this in and made the default is tremendous.
> We are the key log in a logjam of projects coming into M6.
>
> I apologize in advance to the existing developers doing partial builds, and I know how this will complicate their lives,
> at least for a short time.
> Certainly, for a short period of time, the old makefiles still exist, so we have time after M6 to work some of these issues out.
>
> I'm fully expecting horrible poems to be written about me on the walls of the bathroom stalls after this. :^(
>
> -kto
For the record then I think that incremental build performance is much 
higher priority than the performance of a full build. I say this because 
full builds likely be relatively rare. Anyway my concerns about the 
incremental build might be mute now as I see that the sjavac work has 
just been funded and targeted to M6.

-Alan.