RFR: 8257733: Move module-specific data from make to respective module [v6]

[Magnus Ihse Bursie]

On Tue, 15 Mar 2022 23:50:20 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie <ihse at openjdk.org> wrote:

>> A lot (but not all) of the data in make/data is tied to a specific module. For instance, the publicsuffixlist is used by java.base, and fontconfig by java.desktop. (A few directories, like mainmanifest, is *actually* used by make for the whole build.) 
>> 
>> These data files should move to the module they belong to. The are, after all, "source code" for that module that is "compiler" into resulting deliverables, for that module. (But the "source code" language is not Java or C, but typically a highly domain specific language or data format, and the "compilation" is, often, a specialized transformation.) 
>> 
>> This misplacement of the data directory is most visible at code review time. When such data is changed, most of the time build-dev (or the new build label) is involved, even though this has nothing to do with the build. While this is annoying, a worse problem is if the actual team that needs to review the patch (i.e., the team owning the module) is missed in the review.
>> 
>> ### Modules reviewed
>> 
>> - [x] java.base
>> - [x] java.desktop
>> - [x] jdk.compiler
>> - [x] java.se
>
> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The pull request now contains 12 commits:
> 
>  - Merge branch 'master' into shuffle-data-reborn
>  - Fix merge
>  - Merge tag 'jdk-19+13' into shuffle-data-reborn
>    
>    Added tag jdk-19+13 for changeset 5df2a057
>  - Move characterdata templates to share/classes/java/lang.
>  - Update comment refering to "make" dir
>  - Move new symbols to jdk.compiler
>  - Merge branch 'master' into shuffle-data
>  - Move macosxicons from share to macosx
>  - Move to share/data, and move jdwp.spec to java.se
>  - Update references in test
>  - ... and 2 more: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/compare/83d77186...598f740f

I have carefully reviewed all PR comments, and the changes I made in response to them. I believe I have resolved all requests from reviewers. What remained to do was to create an informational JEP about the new source structure, and file some follow-up issues.

I have now created and submitted a new informational JEP ("JDK Source Structure"), available at https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8283227. When creating this JEP, it felt increasingly silly to just copy and extend the part about src/$MODULE from JEP 201, so I extended it to cover a relevant overview of the entire JDK source base structure. I actually think this JEP has a good merit on its own, notwithstanding it being a reviewer requirement for this PR.

I have also filed follow up issues for the non-standard jdk.hotspot.agent `doc` and `test` directories (https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8283197 and https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8283198, respectively).

I have filed a follow up issue for continued efforts to clean up charsetmapping, https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8283228.

There were two open questions:

 * should jdwp.spec belong to specs directory instead of data
 * should bin/idea.sh be changed to exclude data

but they sounded so exploratory that I decided not to open JBS issues for them.

@wangweij  @naotoj  @prrace  @erikj79 @jonathan-gibbons  You have all approved this PR at an older revision. Can you please reconfirm that your approval stands for the latest revision? (Sorry for the mass ping)

-------------

PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/jdk/pull/1611