From openjdk at gatworks.com Fri Jul 1 19:10:14 2011 From: openjdk at gatworks.com (Uncle George) Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 15:10:14 -0400 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? Message-ID: <4E0E1B96.3050206@gatworks.com> on page: > http://openjdk.java.net/guide/repositories.html#clone one is given the request to find forest extensions. > After installing Mercurial, acquire and install the Forest Extension available at > > http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/ForestExtension. The source seems to not exist. any other places to locate? From kelly.ohair at oracle.com Fri Jul 1 19:25:43 2011 From: kelly.ohair at oracle.com (Kelly O'Hair) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 12:25:43 -0700 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: <4E0E1B96.3050206@gatworks.com> References: <4E0E1B96.3050206@gatworks.com> Message-ID: <92E7C86A-0051-49BA-9A6D-D1EE4BFC23E9@oracle.com> On Jul 1, 2011, at 12:10 PM, Uncle George wrote: > on page: > >> http://openjdk.java.net/guide/repositories.html#clone > > one is given the request to find forest extensions. > >> After installing Mercurial, acquire and install the Forest Extension available at >> >> http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/ForestExtension. > > The source seems to not exist. > > any other places to locate? > https://bitbucket.org/pmezard/hgforest-crew/overview/ But note that this will not work with older Mercurials versions, not exactly sure what versions of Mercurial work with what versions of the Forest Extension. See http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/build/raw-file/tip/README-builds.html#hg The Forest Extension has been problematic and we are moving away from it. You can completely avoid the Forest Extension by doing: hg clone http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7 YourOpenJDK cd YourOpenJDK sh ./get_source.sh -kto From omajid at redhat.com Fri Jul 1 19:34:42 2011 From: omajid at redhat.com (Omair Majid) Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 15:34:42 -0400 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: <4E0E1B96.3050206@gatworks.com> References: <4E0E1B96.3050206@gatworks.com> Message-ID: <4E0E2152.40301@redhat.com> On 07/01/2011 03:10 PM, Uncle George wrote: > on page: > >> http://openjdk.java.net/guide/repositories.html#clone > > one is given the request to find forest extensions. > >> After installing Mercurial, acquire and install the Forest Extension >> available at >> >> http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/ForestExtension. > > The source seems to not exist. > > any other places to locate? > As the message on the ForestExtension web page indicates, the extension has been deprecated. OpenJDK repos contain a script that emulates the ForestExtension. The script is normally located at make/scripts/hgforest [1]. After you have cloned the top level openjdk repository, you can use the script to do some of the operations normally handled by ForestExtension. If you really want to use the ForestExtension, Mark Wielaard maintains an updated version for use with OpenJDK: http://icedtea.classpath.org/hg/hgforest/ Cheers, Omair [1] In the case of openjdk6, that would be : http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk6/jdk6/file/bc945e8013c7/make/scripts/hgforest.sh From openjdk at gatworks.com Fri Jul 1 19:40:24 2011 From: openjdk at gatworks.com (Uncle George) Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 15:40:24 -0400 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: <4E0E2152.40301@redhat.com> References: <4E0E1B96.3050206@gatworks.com> <4E0E2152.40301@redhat.com> Message-ID: <4E0E22A8.6080905@gatworks.com> On 07/01/2011 03:34 PM, Omair Majid wrote: > If you really want to use the ForestExtension, Mark Wielaard maintains > an updated version for use with OpenJDK: > http://icedtea.classpath.org/hg/hgforest/ > > Cheers, > Omair Those are the ( specific openjdk ) instructions on how to setup your system to build openjdk. From roman at kennke.org Fri Jul 1 20:00:52 2011 From: roman at kennke.org (Roman Kennke) Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 22:00:52 +0200 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: <92E7C86A-0051-49BA-9A6D-D1EE4BFC23E9@oracle.com> References: <4E0E1B96.3050206@gatworks.com> <92E7C86A-0051-49BA-9A6D-D1EE4BFC23E9@oracle.com> Message-ID: <1309550452.3290.3.camel@debian> Hi Kelly and all, I don't know if this has been discussed before, but why not use the subrepo extension for OpenJDK. It seems to replace the forest extension and is a little easier to use, and I believe it ships with standard Mercurial. Any pros and cons? Regards, Roman Am Freitag, den 01.07.2011, 12:25 -0700 schrieb Kelly O'Hair: > On Jul 1, 2011, at 12:10 PM, Uncle George wrote: > > > on page: > > > >> http://openjdk.java.net/guide/repositories.html#clone > > > > one is given the request to find forest extensions. > > > >> After installing Mercurial, acquire and install the Forest Extension available at > >> > >> http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/ForestExtension. > > > > The source seems to not exist. > > > > any other places to locate? > > > > https://bitbucket.org/pmezard/hgforest-crew/overview/ > > But note that this will not work with older Mercurials versions, not exactly sure what > versions of Mercurial work with what versions of the Forest Extension. > > See http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/build/raw-file/tip/README-builds.html#hg > > The Forest Extension has been problematic and we are moving away from it. > > You can completely avoid the Forest Extension by doing: > > hg clone http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7 YourOpenJDK > cd YourOpenJDK > sh ./get_source.sh > > -kto From kelly.ohair at oracle.com Fri Jul 1 20:06:03 2011 From: kelly.ohair at oracle.com (Kelly O'Hair) Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2011 13:06:03 -0700 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: <1309550452.3290.3.camel@debian> References: <4E0E1B96.3050206@gatworks.com> <92E7C86A-0051-49BA-9A6D-D1EE4BFC23E9@oracle.com> <1309550452.3290.3.camel@debian> Message-ID: <49C58265-E024-4622-AC63-4894C23EB47F@oracle.com> Trust me it has been discussed. The subrepos extension has it's problems, primarily it doesn't allow us to work with partial forests or displace nested repos, and makes like difficult with open&closed situations. Various proposals have been suggested, but it always seems like we are twisting ourselves into a pretzel to use it. -kto On Jul 1, 2011, at 1:00 PM, Roman Kennke wrote: > Hi Kelly and all, > > I don't know if this has been discussed before, but why not use the > subrepo extension for OpenJDK. It seems to replace the forest extension > and is a little easier to use, and I believe it ships with standard > Mercurial. Any pros and cons? > > Regards, Roman > > > Am Freitag, den 01.07.2011, 12:25 -0700 schrieb Kelly O'Hair: >> On Jul 1, 2011, at 12:10 PM, Uncle George wrote: >> >>> on page: >>> >>>> http://openjdk.java.net/guide/repositories.html#clone >>> >>> one is given the request to find forest extensions. >>> >>>> After installing Mercurial, acquire and install the Forest Extension available at >>>> >>>> http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/ForestExtension. >>> >>> The source seems to not exist. >>> >>> any other places to locate? >>> >> >> https://bitbucket.org/pmezard/hgforest-crew/overview/ >> >> But note that this will not work with older Mercurials versions, not exactly sure what >> versions of Mercurial work with what versions of the Forest Extension. >> >> See http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/build/raw-file/tip/README-builds.html#hg >> >> The Forest Extension has been problematic and we are moving away from it. >> >> You can completely avoid the Forest Extension by doing: >> >> hg clone http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7 YourOpenJDK >> cd YourOpenJDK >> sh ./get_source.sh >> >> -kto > > From neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com Fri Jul 1 20:51:15 2011 From: neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com (=?utf-8?B?bmV1Z2Vucy5saW1hc29mdHdhcmVAZ21haWwuY29t?=) Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 22:51:15 +0200 Subject: =?utf-8?B?UmU6IEZvcmVzdCBFeHRlbnNpb24gLSBOb3QgdG8gYmUgZm91bmQ/?= Message-ID: <4e0e3350.4d39e30a.665b.ffffd290@mx.google.com> I agree, subrepos are nice for the development model they support, but a pain otherwise. Forest were such a useful feature, sad they are depreciated in favour of the subrepos... however, you could still work with partial forest, the problem is that you have to remember to update the parent forest if you want changes to be propagated correctly. The script does the right thing though, so I guess there us no real reason to get back :) Mario -- Sent from HTC Desire... pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF http://www.icedrobot.org Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ Please, support open standards: http://endsoftpatents.org/ ----- Reply message ----- Da: "Kelly O'Hair" Data: ven, lug 1, 2011 22:06 Oggetto: Forest Extension - Not to be found? A: "Roman Kennke" Cc: Trust me it has been discussed. The subrepos extension has it's problems, primarily it doesn't allow us to work with partial forests or displace nested repos, and makes like difficult with open&closed situations. Various proposals have been suggested, but it always seems like we are twisting ourselves into a pretzel to use it. -kto On Jul 1, 2011, at 1:00 PM, Roman Kennke wrote: > Hi Kelly and all, > > I don't know if this has been discussed before, but why not use the > subrepo extension for OpenJDK. It seems to replace the forest extension > and is a little easier to use, and I believe it ships with standard > Mercurial. Any pros and cons? > > Regards, Roman > > > Am Freitag, den 01.07.2011, 12:25 -0700 schrieb Kelly O'Hair: >> On Jul 1, 2011, at 12:10 PM, Uncle George wrote: >> >>> on page: >>> >>>> http://openjdk.java.net/guide/repositories.html#clone >>> >>> one is given the request to find forest extensions. >>> >>>> After installing Mercurial, acquire and install the Forest Extension available at >>>> >>>> http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/ForestExtension. >>> >>> The source seems to not exist. >>> >>> any other places to locate? >>> >> >> https://bitbucket.org/pmezard/hgforest-crew/overview/ >> >> But note that this will not work with older Mercurials versions, not exactly sure what >> versions of Mercurial work with what versions of the Forest Extension. >> >> See http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/build/raw-file/tip/README-builds.html#hg >> >> The Forest Extension has been problematic and we are moving away from it. >> >> You can completely avoid the Forest Extension by doing: >> >> hg clone http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7 YourOpenJDK >> cd YourOpenJDK >> sh ./get_source.sh >> >> -kto > > From openjdk at gatworks.com Fri Jul 1 21:29:32 2011 From: openjdk at gatworks.com (Uncle George) Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2011 17:29:32 -0400 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: <4e0e3350.4d39e30a.665b.ffffd290@mx.google.com> References: <4e0e3350.4d39e30a.665b.ffffd290@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <4E0E3C3C.8070005@gatworks.com> On 07/01/2011 04:51 PM, neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com wrote: > orest were such a useful feature, sad they are depreciated in favour of the subrepos... Can someone update the on-line DOC's to point/state to what is needed to build openJDK considering the demise of the forestry project. > http://openjdk.java.net/guide/repositories.html#clone From neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com Fri Jul 1 22:07:42 2011 From: neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com (=?utf-8?B?bmV1Z2Vucy5saW1hc29mdHdhcmVAZ21haWwuY29t?=) Date: Sat, 02 Jul 2011 00:07:42 +0200 Subject: =?utf-8?B?UmU6IEZvcmVzdCBFeHRlbnNpb24gLSBOb3QgdG8gYmUgZm91bmQ/?= Message-ID: <4e0e453a.dc97d80a.15ce.ffffc76c@mx.google.com> I will not have access to a computer until Monday, but you are right, we should update the docs if they are still pointing to the old requirement. I'll prepare a patch when I'm back on Monday if nobody else does it before me. Mario -- Sent from HTC Desire... pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF http://www.icedrobot.org Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ Please, support open standards: http://endsoftpatents.org/ ----- Reply message ----- Da: "Uncle George" Data: ven, lug 1, 2011 23:29 Oggetto: Forest Extension - Not to be found? A: On 07/01/2011 04:51 PM, neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com wrote: > orest were such a useful feature, sad they are depreciated in favour of the subrepos... Can someone update the on-line DOC's to point/state to what is needed to build openJDK considering the demise of the forestry project. > http://openjdk.java.net/guide/repositories.html#clone From Peter.B.Kessler at Oracle.COM Thu Jul 7 18:51:50 2011 From: Peter.B.Kessler at Oracle.COM (Peter B. Kessler) Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2011 11:51:50 -0700 Subject: Oracle Contributor Agreement FAQ? Message-ID: <4E160046.3030804@Oracle.COM> The OpenJDK legal page[1] contain a reference to (a copy of?) the Oracle Contributor Agreement[2] (cf. the more central OCA[3]?). The OpenJDK legal page also refers to a FAQ for the OCA[4] which might be same as the more central FAQ[5]. By either path, the OCA FAQ contains a bunch of links that are broken: - Page 5, the "feedback through email" link points to some place on www.sun.com that bounces to a generic Oracle and Sun page[6]. - Page 5, there is a link that says it points to version 1.5 ("in the interest of transparency"), but which in fact points to the current version[3], and there claim to be links to versions 1.3[7] and 1.4[8], neither of which can be found on the oss.oracle.com web site. - Page 1 has a link to a different OCA for use by the US Government[9], which can't be found. What would it take to bring these documents up to date? ... peter [1] http://openjdk.java.net/legal/ [2] http://openjdk.java.net/legal/oca.pdf [3] http://oss.oracle.com/oca.pdf (which redirects to http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-405177.pdf?) [4] http://openjdk.java.net/legal/oca-faq.pdf [5] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-faq-405384.pdf [6] http://www.oracle.com/us/sun/index.htm [7] http://oss.oracle.com/oca-1.3.pdf [8] http://oss.oracle.com/oca-1.4.pdf [9] http://oss.oracle.com/government-oca.pdf From neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com Thu Jul 7 19:32:02 2011 From: neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com (Mario Torre) Date: Thu, 07 Jul 2011 21:32:02 +0200 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: <4e0e453a.dc97d80a.15ce.ffffc76c@mx.google.com> References: <4e0e453a.dc97d80a.15ce.ffffc76c@mx.google.com> Message-ID: <1310067123.4394.1.camel@galactica> Il giorno sab, 02/07/2011 alle 00.07 +0200, neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com ha scritto: > I will not have access to a computer until Monday, but you are right, > we should update the docs if they are still pointing to the old > requirement. I'll prepare a patch when I'm back on Monday if nobody > else does it before me. > > Mario Which brings now an interesting question... Where are the sources of those docs located? Cheers, Mario From mark at klomp.org Tue Jul 12 10:40:43 2011 From: mark at klomp.org (Mark Wielaard) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 12:40:43 +0200 Subject: 7045697: JDK7 THIRD PARTY README update Message-ID: <1310467243.3271.10.camel@springer.wildebeest.org> Hi, Sorry for the late response, but I just stumbled upon: > hg: jdk7/tl: 7045697: JDK7 THIRD PARTY README update > Changeset: 93d2590fd849 > Author: jeff > Date: 2011-05-27 14:57 -0700 > URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/rev/93d2590fd849 > > 7045697: JDK7 THIRD PARTY README update > Reviewed-by: lana > > ! THIRD_PARTY_README Since this is a license update I wanted to double check, but the change diff is somewhat hard to read. Sadly I couldn't find the mailinglist this was discussed on, nor does the referenced bug report make clear what exactly was fixed/changed. Could someone summarize the legal updates, or point me to the correct mailing list archive discussion on this changeset? Thanks, Mark From ahughes at redhat.com Tue Jul 12 13:34:17 2011 From: ahughes at redhat.com (Andrew John Hughes) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 14:34:17 +0100 Subject: 7045697: JDK7 THIRD PARTY README update In-Reply-To: <1310467243.3271.10.camel@springer.wildebeest.org> References: <1310467243.3271.10.camel@springer.wildebeest.org> Message-ID: <20110712133417.GH14335@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 12:40:43PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote: > Hi, > > Sorry for the late response, but I just stumbled upon: > > hg: jdk7/tl: 7045697: JDK7 THIRD PARTY README update > > Changeset: 93d2590fd849 > > Author: jeff > > Date: 2011-05-27 14:57 -0700 > > URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/rev/93d2590fd849 > > > > 7045697: JDK7 THIRD PARTY README update > > Reviewed-by: lana > > > > ! THIRD_PARTY_README > > Since this is a license update I wanted to double check, but the change > diff is somewhat hard to read. Sadly I couldn't find the mailinglist > this was discussed on, nor does the referenced bug report make clear > what exactly was fixed/changed. Could someone summarize the legal > updates, or point me to the correct mailing list archive discussion on > this changeset? > I also couldn't find any discussion on this either, and two of the dependent bugs are not visible. Of particular concern is: + +%% This notice is provided with respect to Elliptic Curve Cryptography, which +is included with JRE 7, JDK 7, and OpenJDK 7. + +You are receiving a copy of the Elliptic Curve Cryptography library in source +form with the JDK 7 source distribution and object code in the JRE 7 & JDK 7 +runtime. + +The terms of the Oracle license do NOT apply to the Elliptic Curve +Cryptography library program; it is licensed under the following license, +separately from the Oracle programs you receive. If you do not wish to install +this program, you may delete the library named libsunec.so (on Solaris and +Linux systems) or sunec.dll (on Windows systems) from the JRE bin directory +reserved for native libraries. It is not completely clear that the 'Oracle license' is the lesser GPL 2.1 that appears below; is this the case and could this not be stated explicitly in the text? The above also speaks about removing binaries. I didn't think binaries were allowed in the OpenJDK source trees? I also didn't realise we were receiving any 'Oracle programs'. > Thanks, > > Mark -- Andrew :) Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) Support Free Java! Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath http://icedtea.classpath.org PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 From bradford.wetmore at oracle.com Wed Jul 13 01:21:31 2011 From: bradford.wetmore at oracle.com (Brad Wetmore) Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 18:21:31 -0700 Subject: 7045697: JDK7 THIRD PARTY README update In-Reply-To: <20110712133417.GH14335@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> References: <1310467243.3271.10.camel@springer.wildebeest.org> <20110712133417.GH14335@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> Message-ID: <4E1CF31B.2070802@oracle.com> Hi Mark/Andrew, I can't answer all of your questions. I'm trying to find out who asked for the change and have them respond. On 7/12/2011 6:34 AM, Andrew John Hughes wrote: > On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 12:40:43PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote: >> Since this is a license update I wanted to double check, but the change >> diff is somewhat hard to read. Sadly I couldn't find the mailinglist >> this was discussed on, nor does the referenced bug report make clear >> what exactly was fixed/changed. Could someone summarize the legal >> updates, or point me to the correct mailing list archive discussion on >> this changeset? > > I also couldn't find any discussion on this either, and two of the > dependent bugs are not visible. I'm not sure if there was an external discussion. There has been an ongoing effort to make sure all of the proper attributions have been made, so it probably came from that group. Of particular concern is: > > + > +%% This notice is provided with respect to Elliptic Curve Cryptography, which > +is included with JRE 7, JDK 7, and OpenJDK 7. > + > +You are receiving a copy of the Elliptic Curve Cryptography library in source > +form with the JDK 7 source distribution and object code in the JRE 7& JDK 7 > +runtime. > + > +The terms of the Oracle license do NOT apply to the Elliptic Curve > +Cryptography library program; it is licensed under the following license, > +separately from the Oracle programs you receive. If you do not wish to install > +this program, you may delete the library named libsunec.so (on Solaris and > +Linux systems) or sunec.dll (on Windows systems) from the JRE bin directory > +reserved for native libraries. > > It is not completely clear that the 'Oracle license' is the lesser GPL 2.1 > that appears below; is this the case and could this not be stated explicitly > in the text? Good question, I don't know. > The above also speaks about removing binaries. I didn't think binaries were > allowed in the OpenJDK source trees? I believe this file is meant to be installed in the final JRE/JDK products under /THIRDPARTYLICENSEREADME.txt (Kelly?). So I think this phrase is referring to the built Oracle products. These two dynamic lib files are definitely not checked into the source trees, they are built as part of the OpenJDK/OracleJDK builds. (jdk/src/share/classes/sun/security/ec/*, jdk/make/sun/security/ec/*) > I also didn't realise we were receiving > any 'Oracle programs'. Probably some boilerplate from somewhere, the person who asked for the change should address this point. I know this is not a complete answer, but hope this helps a little. Brad From kelly.ohair at oracle.com Wed Jul 13 15:59:39 2011 From: kelly.ohair at oracle.com (Kelly O'Hair) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 08:59:39 -0700 Subject: 7045697: JDK7 THIRD PARTY README update In-Reply-To: <4E1CF31B.2070802@oracle.com> References: <1310467243.3271.10.camel@springer.wildebeest.org> <20110712133417.GH14335@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> <4E1CF31B.2070802@oracle.com> Message-ID: <5FC0E464-27B6-48DC-80EA-89149FC5C703@oracle.com> Hopefully Jeff will reply on this. There are 2 Third Party Readme files, one sits at the top of all the open source repositories for the open source, the other is placed in the built Oracle JDK images. There was a great deal of duplication in these files, but one was a closed legal file, and the other an open one, and managing the contents of these files is not trivial. Unfortunately it was not possible to do all this work in the open. As I understood it, there were some minor corrections, but mostly just a cleanup of the existing file. Nothing earth shaking that I can remember. -kto From jeff.dinkins at oracle.com Wed Jul 13 18:04:46 2011 From: jeff.dinkins at oracle.com (Jeff Dinkins) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 11:04:46 -0700 Subject: 7045697: JDK7 THIRD PARTY README update In-Reply-To: <20110712133417.GH14335@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> References: <1310467243.3271.10.camel@springer.wildebeest.org> <20110712133417.GH14335@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> Message-ID: <8206A653-6B17-4D05-BF24-224F11AEC72B@oracle.com> Hi Andrew - sorry for the late response, Looking at the ECC text, I agree that it's confusing - we're going to work on getting it tidied up. > The above also speaks about removing binaries. I didn't think binaries were > allowed in the OpenJDK source trees? I also didn't realise we were receiving > any 'Oracle programs'. This only applies to the Oracle products (JRE 7, JDK 7), not OpenJDK. I'll work with the right people to update the text to be clearer. Likewise I'll see if we can rework the verbiage about "the Oracle license" and "Oracle programs". As Kelly mentioned, in the past managing the TPRM has raised some questions, evidenced by some bugs such as in [1], and this was an effort to address some of that in parallel with some other general updates. We realize based on your questions/concerns we didn't get it quite right and need to rework this (in the open) to get it exactly right. Apologies, and thanks! [1] http://icedtea.classpath.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=138 On Jul 12, 2011, at 6:34 AM, Andrew John Hughes wrote: > On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 12:40:43PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Sorry for the late response, but I just stumbled upon: >>> hg: jdk7/tl: 7045697: JDK7 THIRD PARTY README update >>> Changeset: 93d2590fd849 >>> Author: jeff >>> Date: 2011-05-27 14:57 -0700 >>> URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/rev/93d2590fd849 >>> >>> 7045697: JDK7 THIRD PARTY README update >>> Reviewed-by: lana >>> >>> ! THIRD_PARTY_README >> >> Since this is a license update I wanted to double check, but the change >> diff is somewhat hard to read. Sadly I couldn't find the mailinglist >> this was discussed on, nor does the referenced bug report make clear >> what exactly was fixed/changed. Could someone summarize the legal >> updates, or point me to the correct mailing list archive discussion on >> this changeset? >> > > I also couldn't find any discussion on this either, and two of the > dependent bugs are not visible. Of particular concern is: > > + > +%% This notice is provided with respect to Elliptic Curve Cryptography, which > +is included with JRE 7, JDK 7, and OpenJDK 7. > + > +You are receiving a copy of the Elliptic Curve Cryptography library in source > +form with the JDK 7 source distribution and object code in the JRE 7 & JDK 7 > +runtime. > + > +The terms of the Oracle license do NOT apply to the Elliptic Curve > +Cryptography library program; it is licensed under the following license, > +separately from the Oracle programs you receive. If you do not wish to install > +this program, you may delete the library named libsunec.so (on Solaris and > +Linux systems) or sunec.dll (on Windows systems) from the JRE bin directory > +reserved for native libraries. > > It is not completely clear that the 'Oracle license' is the lesser GPL 2.1 > that appears below; is this the case and could this not be stated explicitly > in the text? > > The above also speaks about removing binaries. I didn't think binaries were > allowed in the OpenJDK source trees? I also didn't realise we were receiving > any 'Oracle programs'. > >> Thanks, >> >> Mark > > -- > Andrew :) > > Free Java Software Engineer > Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) > > Support Free Java! > Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea > http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath > http://icedtea.classpath.org > PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) > Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 From ahughes at redhat.com Wed Jul 13 20:14:51 2011 From: ahughes at redhat.com (Andrew John Hughes) Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2011 21:14:51 +0100 Subject: 7045697: JDK7 THIRD PARTY README update In-Reply-To: <8206A653-6B17-4D05-BF24-224F11AEC72B@oracle.com> References: <1310467243.3271.10.camel@springer.wildebeest.org> <20110712133417.GH14335@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> <8206A653-6B17-4D05-BF24-224F11AEC72B@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20110713201451.GM16917@shelob.middle-earth.co.uk> On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 11:04:46AM -0700, Jeff Dinkins wrote: > > Hi Andrew - sorry for the late response, > > Looking at the ECC text, I agree that it's confusing - we're going to work on getting it tidied up. > > > The above also speaks about removing binaries. I didn't think binaries were > > allowed in the OpenJDK source trees? I also didn't realise we were receiving > > any 'Oracle programs'. > > This only applies to the Oracle products (JRE 7, JDK 7), not OpenJDK. I'll work with the right people to update the text to be clearer. Ah, I was wondering if that was the case! It makes a lot more sense now. > > Likewise I'll see if we can rework the verbiage about "the Oracle license" and "Oracle programs". > > As Kelly mentioned, in the past managing the TPRM has raised some questions, evidenced by some bugs such as in [1], and this was an effort to address some of that in parallel with some other general updates. Yeah, I noticed one of these was from us... ;-) That bit I'm familiar with. > > We realize based on your questions/concerns we didn't get it quite right and need to rework this (in the open) to get it exactly right. Apologies, and thanks! > Thanks for listening to our feedback. Much appreciated. > [1] http://icedtea.classpath.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=138 > > > On Jul 12, 2011, at 6:34 AM, Andrew John Hughes wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 12:40:43PM +0200, Mark Wielaard wrote: > >> Hi, > >> > >> Sorry for the late response, but I just stumbled upon: > >>> hg: jdk7/tl: 7045697: JDK7 THIRD PARTY README update > >>> Changeset: 93d2590fd849 > >>> Author: jeff > >>> Date: 2011-05-27 14:57 -0700 > >>> URL: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/tl/rev/93d2590fd849 > >>> > >>> 7045697: JDK7 THIRD PARTY README update > >>> Reviewed-by: lana > >>> > >>> ! THIRD_PARTY_README > >> > >> Since this is a license update I wanted to double check, but the change > >> diff is somewhat hard to read. Sadly I couldn't find the mailinglist > >> this was discussed on, nor does the referenced bug report make clear > >> what exactly was fixed/changed. Could someone summarize the legal > >> updates, or point me to the correct mailing list archive discussion on > >> this changeset? > >> > > > > I also couldn't find any discussion on this either, and two of the > > dependent bugs are not visible. Of particular concern is: > > > > + > > +%% This notice is provided with respect to Elliptic Curve Cryptography, which > > +is included with JRE 7, JDK 7, and OpenJDK 7. > > + > > +You are receiving a copy of the Elliptic Curve Cryptography library in source > > +form with the JDK 7 source distribution and object code in the JRE 7 & JDK 7 > > +runtime. > > + > > +The terms of the Oracle license do NOT apply to the Elliptic Curve > > +Cryptography library program; it is licensed under the following license, > > +separately from the Oracle programs you receive. If you do not wish to install > > +this program, you may delete the library named libsunec.so (on Solaris and > > +Linux systems) or sunec.dll (on Windows systems) from the JRE bin directory > > +reserved for native libraries. > > > > It is not completely clear that the 'Oracle license' is the lesser GPL 2.1 > > that appears below; is this the case and could this not be stated explicitly > > in the text? > > > > The above also speaks about removing binaries. I didn't think binaries were > > allowed in the OpenJDK source trees? I also didn't realise we were receiving > > any 'Oracle programs'. > > > >> Thanks, > >> > >> Mark > > > > -- > > Andrew :) > > > > Free Java Software Engineer > > Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) > > > > Support Free Java! > > Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea > > http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath > > http://icedtea.classpath.org > > PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) > > Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 > -- Andrew :) Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) Support Free Java! Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath http://icedtea.classpath.org PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 From volker.simonis at sap.com Thu Jul 14 15:32:17 2011 From: volker.simonis at sap.com (Simonis, Volker) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 17:32:17 +0200 Subject: SAP joins the OpenJDK Message-ID: <2F00A00719472747B614F605D18F7D5E1BDFBA19FC@DEWDFECCR03.wdf.sap.corp> Dear all, I'm really happy that as of today, SAP has signed the Oracle Contributor Agreement (OCA). This means that with immediate effect the SAP JVM developers can officially join the discussions on the various OpenJDK mailing lists and contribute patches and enhancements to the project. SAP is a long time Sun and now Oracle Java source licensee who has ported the original Sun (now Oracle) JDK to all the 14 SAP supported platforms (including the Oracle supported Linux/Windows/Solaris platforms plus Win/IA64, AS400/PPC64, HPUX/PARISC, HPUX/IA64, Linux/IA64, Linux/PPC64, Linux/S390, AIX/PPC64). I'm sure this move will be fruitful and beneficial for both, the OpenJDK community as well as SAP. Looking forward to working with you, Volker Simonis and the whole SAP JVM team From neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com Thu Jul 14 16:01:42 2011 From: neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com (=?utf-8?B?bmV1Z2Vucy5saW1hc29mdHdhcmVAZ21haWwuY29t?=) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 18:01:42 +0200 Subject: =?utf-8?B?UmU6IFNBUCBqb2lucyB0aGUgT3BlbkpESw==?= Message-ID: <4e1f12f4.0becd80a.4f2b.1c77@mx.google.com> Cheers! This is indeed a great news! Mario -- Sent from HTC Desire... pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF http://www.icedrobot.org Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ Please, support open standards: http://endsoftpatents.org/ ----- Reply message ----- Da: "Simonis, Volker" Data: gio, lug 14, 2011 17:32 Oggetto: SAP joins the OpenJDK A: "discuss at openjdk.java.net" Dear all, I'm really happy that as of today, SAP has signed the Oracle Contributor Agreement (OCA). This means that with immediate effect the SAP JVM developers can officially join the discussions on the various OpenJDK mailing lists and contribute patches and enhancements to the project. SAP is a long time Sun and now Oracle Java source licensee who has ported the original Sun (now Oracle) JDK to all the 14 SAP supported platforms (including the Oracle supported Linux/Windows/Solaris platforms plus Win/IA64, AS400/PPC64, HPUX/PARISC, HPUX/IA64, Linux/IA64, Linux/PPC64, Linux/S390, AIX/PPC64). I'm sure this move will be fruitful and beneficial for both, the OpenJDK community as well as SAP. Looking forward to working with you, Volker Simonis and the whole SAP JVM team From aph at redhat.com Thu Jul 14 16:08:23 2011 From: aph at redhat.com (Andrew Haley) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 17:08:23 +0100 Subject: SAP joins the OpenJDK In-Reply-To: <2F00A00719472747B614F605D18F7D5E1BDFBA19FC@DEWDFECCR03.wdf.sap.corp> References: <2F00A00719472747B614F605D18F7D5E1BDFBA19FC@DEWDFECCR03.wdf.sap.corp> Message-ID: <4E1F1477.4010703@redhat.com> On 07/14/2011 04:32 PM, Simonis, Volker wrote: > > Looking forward to working with you, > Volker Simonis and the whole SAP JVM team Yes, good news. Andrew. From mark.reinhold at oracle.com Thu Jul 14 17:01:28 2011 From: mark.reinhold at oracle.com (mark.reinhold at oracle.com) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 10:01:28 -0700 Subject: SAP joins the OpenJDK In-Reply-To: volker.simonis@sap.com; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 17:32:17 +0200; <2F00A00719472747B614F605D18F7D5E1BDFBA19FC@DEWDFECCR03.wdf.sap.corp> Message-ID: <20110714170128.280171487@eggemoggin.niobe.net> 2011/7/14 8:32 -0700, volker.simonis at sap.com: > I'm really happy that as of today, SAP has signed the Oracle > Contributor Agreement (OCA). This means that with immediate effect the > SAP JVM developers can officially join the discussions on the various > OpenJDK mailing lists and contribute patches and enhancements to the > project. ... Excellent news! Welcome aboard, and thanks for helping to make this happen. - Mark From donald.smith at oracle.com Thu Jul 14 18:10:57 2011 From: donald.smith at oracle.com (Donald Smith) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 14:10:57 -0400 Subject: Oracle Contributor Agreement FAQ? In-Reply-To: <4E160046.3030804@Oracle.COM> References: <4E160046.3030804@Oracle.COM> Message-ID: <4E1F3131.6000304@oracle.com> Peter!!! I am very sorry for not responding sooner. I was out on vacation, took the action to respond and then didn't get back to you. The good news is that we're almost ready to address all these issues. The FAQ is currently being updated, as is the OCA itself. I'll ask that we put a small disclaimer on the links that it's out of date, but should be updated around Aug 1. - Don On 07/07/2011 2:51 PM, Peter B. Kessler wrote: > The OpenJDK legal page[1] contain a reference to (a copy of?) the > Oracle Contributor Agreement[2] (cf. the more central OCA[3]?). > > The OpenJDK legal page also refers to a FAQ for the OCA[4] which might > be same as the more central FAQ[5]. > > By either path, the OCA FAQ contains a bunch of links that are broken: > > - Page 5, the "feedback through email" link points to some place on > www.sun.com that bounces to a generic Oracle and Sun page[6]. > - Page 5, there is a link that says it points to version 1.5 ("in > the interest of transparency"), but which in fact points to the > current version[3], and there claim to be links to versions 1.3[7] and > 1.4[8], neither of which can be found on the oss.oracle.com web site. > - Page 1 has a link to a different OCA for use by the US > Government[9], which can't be found. > > What would it take to bring these documents up to date? > > ... peter > > [1] http://openjdk.java.net/legal/ > [2] http://openjdk.java.net/legal/oca.pdf > [3] http://oss.oracle.com/oca.pdf > (which redirects to > http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-405177.pdf?) > [4] http://openjdk.java.net/legal/oca-faq.pdf > [5] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-faq-405384.pdf > [6] http://www.oracle.com/us/sun/index.htm > [7] http://oss.oracle.com/oca-1.3.pdf > [8] http://oss.oracle.com/oca-1.4.pdf > [9] http://oss.oracle.com/government-oca.pdf From henri.gomez at gmail.com Thu Jul 14 18:35:32 2011 From: henri.gomez at gmail.com (Henri Gomez) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 20:35:32 +0200 Subject: OpenJDK commiters Message-ID: Hi guys, I'm wondering where I could find an up to date list of OpenJDK commiters. I found a list of people here, http://db.openjdk.java.net/people, but is it up to date ? Also did there is a list of people who sign the OCA to contribute to OpenJDK ? Thanks From donald.smith at oracle.com Thu Jul 14 18:48:31 2011 From: donald.smith at oracle.com (Donald Smith) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 14:48:31 -0400 Subject: OpenJDK commiters In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> It's not up to date, and we're no longer planning to publish/update such a list. - Don On 14/07/2011 2:35 PM, Henri Gomez wrote: > Hi guys, > > I'm wondering where I could find an up to date list of OpenJDK commiters. > I found a list of people here, http://db.openjdk.java.net/people, but > is it up to date ? > > Also did there is a list of people who sign the OCA to contribute to OpenJDK ? > > Thanks From roman at kennke.org Thu Jul 14 18:55:30 2011 From: roman at kennke.org (Roman Kennke) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 20:55:30 +0200 Subject: OpenJDK commiters In-Reply-To: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> References: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> Message-ID: <886e45e2711972eb49743997584881d1-EhVcXlhEQQRbRxsfBQQGZ1dfaANWUkNeXENbAF9eNkhdS1kWXVtwH1RdXTBeQkQCWVxQR1tV-webmailer2@server06.webmailer.hosteurope.de> Maybe services like ohloh would bring up interesting analysis? Roman > It's not up to date, and we're no longer planning to publish/update > such a list. > > - Don > > On 14/07/2011 2:35 PM, Henri Gomez wrote: >> Hi guys, >> >> I'm wondering where I could find an up to date list of OpenJDK >> commiters. >> I found a list of people here, http://db.openjdk.java.net/people, >> but >> is it up to date ? >> >> Also did there is a list of people who sign the OCA to contribute to >> OpenJDK ? >> >> Thanks From henri.gomez at gmail.com Thu Jul 14 19:19:25 2011 From: henri.gomez at gmail.com (Henri Gomez) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 21:19:25 +0200 Subject: OpenJDK commiters In-Reply-To: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> References: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> Message-ID: > It's not up to date, and we're no longer planning to publish/update such a > list. May I ask why ? To be short, I've got an interview tomorrow about OpenJDK and one of the expected question is about OpenJDK community, who is involved, how many peoples from big contributors, like Oracle, Redhat, IBM and how many individuals. Various OSS community have such pages where everybody could get informations about members and the who's working on what part of projects. I hope you'll reconsider the decision to update this list. Regards From neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com Thu Jul 14 19:35:17 2011 From: neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com (Mario Torre) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 21:35:17 +0200 Subject: OpenJDK commiters In-Reply-To: References: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> Message-ID: 2011/7/14 Henri Gomez : >> It's not up to date, and we're no longer planning to publish/update such a >> list. > > May I ask why ? > > To be short, I've got an interview tomorrow about OpenJDK and one of > the expected question is about OpenJDK community, who is involved, how > many peoples from big contributors, like Oracle, Redhat, IBM and how > many individuals. > > Various OSS community have such pages where everybody could get > informations about members and the who's working on what part of > projects. > > I hope you'll reconsider the decision to update this list. > > Regards > > It's not up to date, and we're no longer planning to publish/update such a > > list. > > May I ask why ? > > To be short, I've got an interview tomorrow about OpenJDK and one of > the expected question is about OpenJDK community, who is involved, how > many peoples from big contributors, like Oracle, Redhat, IBM and how > many individuals. > > Various OSS community have such pages where everybody could get > informations about members and the who's working on what part of > projects. > > I hope you'll reconsider the decision to update this list. I actually personally never had been listed in any of such pages despite having contributed to a good number of Free Software projects :) Sun/Oracle were the first to do this with me! (well, excluding some changelogs that were cloned on the eternal Google archives, that is). As for the OpenJDK commit list, I actually always found odd (but yet a very welcomed honour nevertheless!) to have such a list. Anyway, if you really want an updated list, probably the list of contributors that voted for the Governance Board a couple of weeks ago is the best place to start searching, I believe (but is just an assumption on my side!) that the list has been built based on the real contributors count. Cheers, Mario -- pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA? FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF IcedRobot: www.icedrobot.org Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ Please, support open standards: http://endsoftpatents.org/ From donald.smith at oracle.com Thu Jul 14 19:41:51 2011 From: donald.smith at oracle.com (Donald Smith) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 15:41:51 -0400 Subject: OpenJDK commiters In-Reply-To: References: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> Message-ID: <4E1F467F.9010803@oracle.com> I understand and sympathize. The issue is related to regional privacy objections, and applies to all the OS projects at Oracle. In the mid to long term, I would definitely like to see an info page for OpenJDK that describes in more detail where various contributions come from, and also from the perspective of organizations and individuals. In the shorter term, I'll endeavor to create a slide or two for the community to use in situations as you describe (but I apologize, I'm unlikely to get that by tomorrow :) - Don On 14/07/2011 3:19 PM, Henri Gomez wrote: > May I ask why ? > > To be short, I've got an interview tomorrow about OpenJDK and one of > the expected question is about OpenJDK community, who is involved, how > many peoples from big contributors, like Oracle, Redhat, IBM and how > many individuals. From henri.gomez at gmail.com Thu Jul 14 19:46:15 2011 From: henri.gomez at gmail.com (Henri Gomez) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 21:46:15 +0200 Subject: OpenJDK commiters In-Reply-To: <4E1F467F.9010803@oracle.com> References: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> <4E1F467F.9010803@oracle.com> Message-ID: I'm a long time Apache member and used to see such pages and informations on the Foundation site. BTW, I'm digging around http://openjdk.java.net/groups/gb/ and didn't informations about commiters voted. Links will be greatly appreciated. Thanks guys 2011/7/14 Donald Smith : > I understand and sympathize. ?The issue is related to regional privacy > objections, and applies to all the OS projects at Oracle. > > In the mid to long term, I would definitely like to see an info page for > OpenJDK that describes in more detail where various contributions come from, > and also from the perspective of organizations and individuals. ?In the > shorter term, I'll endeavor to create a slide or two for the community to > use in situations as you describe (but I apologize, I'm unlikely to get that > by tomorrow :) > > ?- Don > > On 14/07/2011 3:19 PM, Henri Gomez wrote: >> >> May I ask why ? >> >> To be short, I've got an interview tomorrow about OpenJDK and one of >> the expected question is about OpenJDK community, who is involved, how >> many peoples from big contributors, like Oracle, Redhat, IBM and how >> many individuals. > From donald.smith at oracle.com Thu Jul 14 19:49:52 2011 From: donald.smith at oracle.com (Donald Smith) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 15:49:52 -0400 Subject: OpenJDK commiters In-Reply-To: References: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> <4E1F467F.9010803@oracle.com> Message-ID: <4E1F4860.3020403@oracle.com> Do you perhaps mean this? http://openjdk.java.net/poll/bylaws-ratification/ - Don On 14/07/2011 3:46 PM, Henri Gomez wrote: > I'm a long time Apache member and used to see such pages and > informations on the Foundation site. > > BTW, I'm digging around http://openjdk.java.net/groups/gb/ and didn't > informations about commiters voted. > > Links will be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks guys > > 2011/7/14 Donald Smith: >> I understand and sympathize. The issue is related to regional privacy >> objections, and applies to all the OS projects at Oracle. >> >> In the mid to long term, I would definitely like to see an info page for >> OpenJDK that describes in more detail where various contributions come from, >> and also from the perspective of organizations and individuals. In the >> shorter term, I'll endeavor to create a slide or two for the community to >> use in situations as you describe (but I apologize, I'm unlikely to get that >> by tomorrow :) >> >> - Don >> >> On 14/07/2011 3:19 PM, Henri Gomez wrote: >>> May I ask why ? >>> >>> To be short, I've got an interview tomorrow about OpenJDK and one of >>> the expected question is about OpenJDK community, who is involved, how >>> many peoples from big contributors, like Oracle, Redhat, IBM and how >>> many individuals. From jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com Thu Jul 14 19:52:36 2011 From: jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com (Jonathan Gibbons) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 12:52:36 -0700 Subject: OpenJDK commiters In-Reply-To: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> References: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> Message-ID: <4E1F4904.3060308@oracle.com> You can get a good approximation from "hg log", for the JDK 7 repos. -- Jon On 07/14/2011 11:48 AM, Donald Smith wrote: > It's not up to date, and we're no longer planning to publish/update > such a list. > > - Don > > On 14/07/2011 2:35 PM, Henri Gomez wrote: >> Hi guys, >> >> I'm wondering where I could find an up to date list of OpenJDK >> commiters. >> I found a list of people here, http://db.openjdk.java.net/people, but >> is it up to date ? >> >> Also did there is a list of people who sign the OCA to contribute to >> OpenJDK ? >> >> Thanks From henri.gomez at gmail.com Thu Jul 14 19:53:45 2011 From: henri.gomez at gmail.com (Henri Gomez) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 21:53:45 +0200 Subject: OpenJDK commiters In-Reply-To: <4E1F4860.3020403@oracle.com> References: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> <4E1F467F.9010803@oracle.com> <4E1F4860.3020403@oracle.com> Message-ID: > Do you perhaps mean this? > > http://openjdk.java.net/poll/bylaws-ratification/ Perfect, thanks Donald ! From neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com Thu Jul 14 20:00:02 2011 From: neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com (Mario Torre) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 22:00:02 +0200 Subject: OpenJDK commiters In-Reply-To: <4E1F4860.3020403@oracle.com> References: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> <4E1F467F.9010803@oracle.com> <4E1F4860.3020403@oracle.com> Message-ID: 2011/7/14 Henri Gomez : >> Do you perhaps mean this? >> >> http://openjdk.java.net/poll/bylaws-ratification/ Exactly, but you can get the list of committers directly from mercurial, although I'm not sure if we are listed by name, I believe we are only by login name. Mario -- pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA? FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF IcedRobot: www.icedrobot.org Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ Please, support open standards: http://endsoftpatents.org/ From henri.gomez at gmail.com Thu Jul 14 20:13:14 2011 From: henri.gomez at gmail.com (Henri Gomez) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 22:13:14 +0200 Subject: OpenJDK commiters In-Reply-To: References: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> <4E1F467F.9010803@oracle.com> <4E1F4860.3020403@oracle.com> Message-ID: > Exactly, but you can get the list of committers directly from > mercurial, although I'm not sure if we are listed by name, I believe > we are only by login name. yes, hg log report login names :) From jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com Thu Jul 14 20:23:17 2011 From: jonathan.gibbons at oracle.com (Jonathan Gibbons) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 13:23:17 -0700 Subject: OpenJDK commiters In-Reply-To: References: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> <4E1F467F.9010803@oracle.com> <4E1F4860.3020403@oracle.com> Message-ID: <4E1F5035.7010102@oracle.com> On 07/14/2011 01:13 PM, Henri Gomez wrote: >> Exactly, but you can get the list of committers directly from >> mercurial, although I'm not sure if we are listed by name, I believe >> we are only by login name. > yes, hg log report login names :) Use db.openjdk.java.net/people to get from user names to people and their affiliation, if any. -- Jon From donald.smith at oracle.com Thu Jul 14 20:33:03 2011 From: donald.smith at oracle.com (Donald Smith) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 16:33:03 -0400 Subject: OpenJDK commiters In-Reply-To: <4E1F467F.9010803@oracle.com> References: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> <4E1F467F.9010803@oracle.com> Message-ID: <4E1F527F.3000809@oracle.com> So, I'll put on the "new guy clown nose" here and state that I've conflated your two different questions. This list is, in fact, current OpenJDK committers:http://db.openjdk.java.net/people (or as current as any kind of such information could be). As Roman noted, you can use tools like ohloh if you wanted to get a better indication of how active people are, etc. Apologies for any confusion I made in the other thread. - Don On 14/07/2011 3:41 PM, Donald Smith wrote: > I understand and sympathize. The issue is related to regional privacy > objections, and applies to all the OS projects at Oracle. > > In the mid to long term, I would definitely like to see an info page > for OpenJDK that describes in more detail where various contributions > come from, and also from the perspective of organizations and > individuals. In the shorter term, I'll endeavor to create a slide or > two for the community to use in situations as you describe (but I > apologize, I'm unlikely to get that by tomorrow :) > > - Don > > On 14/07/2011 3:19 PM, Henri Gomez wrote: >> May I ask why ? >> >> To be short, I've got an interview tomorrow about OpenJDK and one of >> the expected question is about OpenJDK community, who is involved, how >> many peoples from big contributors, like Oracle, Redhat, IBM and how >> many individuals. From henri.gomez at gmail.com Thu Jul 14 20:47:11 2011 From: henri.gomez at gmail.com (Henri Gomez) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 22:47:11 +0200 Subject: OpenJDK commiters In-Reply-To: <4E1F527F.3000809@oracle.com> References: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> <4E1F467F.9010803@oracle.com> <4E1F527F.3000809@oracle.com> Message-ID: > As Roman noted, you can use tools like ohloh if you wanted to get a better > indication of how active people are, etc. > > Apologies for any confusion I made in the other thread. No problem :) From mark.reinhold at oracle.com Thu Jul 14 21:01:28 2011 From: mark.reinhold at oracle.com (mark.reinhold at oracle.com) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 14:01:28 -0700 Subject: OpenJDK committers In-Reply-To: donald.smith@oracle.com; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 16:33:03 EDT; <4E1F527F.3000809@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20110714210128.0D2251487@eggemoggin.niobe.net> 2011/7/14 13:33 -0700, donald.smith at oracle.com: > So, I'll put on the "new guy clown nose" here and state that I've conflated > your two different questions. > > This list is, in fact, current OpenJDK > committers:http://db.openjdk.java.net/people > > (or as current as any kind of such information could be). Don -- Thanks for clarifying that. To expand a bit further, we will continue to publish this list and its successor lists once the new Bylaws are in place. A fundamental prerequisite of any open community is transparent information about the participating individuals and their various roles. What Oracle will no longer publish is a global list of all the people who have ever submitted an OCA. - Mark From Peter.B.Kessler at Oracle.COM Thu Jul 14 21:09:20 2011 From: Peter.B.Kessler at Oracle.COM (Peter B. Kessler) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 14:09:20 -0700 Subject: Oracle Contributor Agreement FAQ? In-Reply-To: <4E1F3131.6000304@oracle.com> References: <4E160046.3030804@Oracle.COM> <4E1F3131.6000304@oracle.com> Message-ID: <4E1F5B00.1060008@Oracle.COM> Thanks for looking into this. People are allowed to take vacations! I have a suggestion for the FAQ, if someone is updating it: a pointer to the list of Contributor Agreeement signatories[1]. That might be of interest to people considering signing the OCA. I don't know if it's "frequently asked" for, but it came up on this mailing list just today, as the second (as yet unanswered) question from Henri Gomez. ... peter [1] http://sca.java.net/CA_signatories.htm Donald Smith wrote: > Peter!!! > > I am very sorry for not responding sooner. I was out on vacation, took > the action to respond and then didn't get back to you. > > The good news is that we're almost ready to address all these issues. > The FAQ is currently being updated, as is the OCA itself. I'll ask that > we put a small disclaimer on the links that it's out of date, but should > be updated around Aug 1. > > - Don > > On 07/07/2011 2:51 PM, Peter B. Kessler wrote: >> The OpenJDK legal page[1] contain a reference to (a copy of?) the >> Oracle Contributor Agreement[2] (cf. the more central OCA[3]?). >> >> The OpenJDK legal page also refers to a FAQ for the OCA[4] which might >> be same as the more central FAQ[5]. >> >> By either path, the OCA FAQ contains a bunch of links that are broken: >> >> - Page 5, the "feedback through email" link points to some place on >> www.sun.com that bounces to a generic Oracle and Sun page[6]. >> - Page 5, there is a link that says it points to version 1.5 ("in >> the interest of transparency"), but which in fact points to the >> current version[3], and there claim to be links to versions 1.3[7] and >> 1.4[8], neither of which can be found on the oss.oracle.com web site. >> - Page 1 has a link to a different OCA for use by the US >> Government[9], which can't be found. >> >> What would it take to bring these documents up to date? >> >> ... peter >> >> [1] http://openjdk.java.net/legal/ >> [2] http://openjdk.java.net/legal/oca.pdf >> [3] http://oss.oracle.com/oca.pdf >> (which redirects to >> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-405177.pdf?) >> [4] http://openjdk.java.net/legal/oca-faq.pdf >> [5] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-faq-405384.pdf >> [6] http://www.oracle.com/us/sun/index.htm >> [7] http://oss.oracle.com/oca-1.3.pdf >> [8] http://oss.oracle.com/oca-1.4.pdf >> [9] http://oss.oracle.com/government-oca.pdf From donald.smith at oracle.com Thu Jul 14 21:15:53 2011 From: donald.smith at oracle.com (Donald Smith) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 17:15:53 -0400 Subject: Oracle Contributor Agreement FAQ? In-Reply-To: <4E1F5B00.1060008@Oracle.COM> References: <4E160046.3030804@Oracle.COM> <4E1F3131.6000304@oracle.com> <4E1F5B00.1060008@Oracle.COM> Message-ID: <4E1F5C89.8030109@oracle.com> Now you're just trying to rub salt in my clown-nosed wounds :). That is the list that I thought I saw in Henri's email - this is not current and will not be kept current, per the thread, for regional privacy reasons. - Don On 14/07/2011 5:09 PM, Peter B. Kessler wrote: > Thanks for looking into this. People are allowed to take vacations! > > I have a suggestion for the FAQ, if someone is updating it: a pointer > to the list of Contributor Agreeement signatories[1]. That might be > of interest to people considering signing the OCA. I don't know if > it's "frequently asked" for, but it came up on this mailing list just > today, as the second (as yet unanswered) question from Henri Gomez. > > ... peter > > [1] http://sca.java.net/CA_signatories.htm > > Donald Smith wrote: >> Peter!!! >> >> I am very sorry for not responding sooner. I was out on vacation, >> took the action to respond and then didn't get back to you. >> >> The good news is that we're almost ready to address all these >> issues. The FAQ is currently being updated, as is the OCA itself. >> I'll ask that we put a small disclaimer on the links that it's out of >> date, but should be updated around Aug 1. >> >> - Don >> >> On 07/07/2011 2:51 PM, Peter B. Kessler wrote: >>> The OpenJDK legal page[1] contain a reference to (a copy of?) the >>> Oracle Contributor Agreement[2] (cf. the more central OCA[3]?). >>> >>> The OpenJDK legal page also refers to a FAQ for the OCA[4] which >>> might be same as the more central FAQ[5]. >>> >>> By either path, the OCA FAQ contains a bunch of links that are broken: >>> >>> - Page 5, the "feedback through email" link points to some place >>> on www.sun.com that bounces to a generic Oracle and Sun page[6]. >>> - Page 5, there is a link that says it points to version 1.5 ("in >>> the interest of transparency"), but which in fact points to the >>> current version[3], and there claim to be links to versions 1.3[7] >>> and 1.4[8], neither of which can be found on the oss.oracle.com web >>> site. >>> - Page 1 has a link to a different OCA for use by the US >>> Government[9], which can't be found. >>> >>> What would it take to bring these documents up to date? >>> >>> ... peter >>> >>> [1] http://openjdk.java.net/legal/ >>> [2] http://openjdk.java.net/legal/oca.pdf >>> [3] http://oss.oracle.com/oca.pdf >>> (which redirects to >>> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-405177.pdf?) >>> [4] http://openjdk.java.net/legal/oca-faq.pdf >>> [5] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-faq-405384.pdf >>> [6] http://www.oracle.com/us/sun/index.htm >>> [7] http://oss.oracle.com/oca-1.3.pdf >>> [8] http://oss.oracle.com/oca-1.4.pdf >>> [9] http://oss.oracle.com/government-oca.pdf From storycrafter at gmail.com Thu Jul 14 21:22:03 2011 From: storycrafter at gmail.com (Mark Martin) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 16:22:03 -0500 Subject: OpenJDK committers In-Reply-To: <20110714210128.0D2251487@eggemoggin.niobe.net> References: <4E1F527F.3000809@oracle.com> <20110714210128.0D2251487@eggemoggin.niobe.net> Message-ID: On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 4:01 PM, wrote: > 2011/7/14 13:33 -0700, donald.smith at oracle.com: >> So, I'll put on the "new guy clown nose" here and state that I've conflated >> your two different questions. >> >> This list is, in fact, current OpenJDK >> committers:http://db.openjdk.java.net/people >> >> (or as current as any kind of such information could be). > > Don -- Thanks for clarifying that. > > To expand a bit further, we will continue to publish this list and > its successor lists once the new Bylaws are in place. ?A fundamental > prerequisite of any open community is transparent information about > the participating individuals and their various roles. > > What Oracle will no longer publish is a global list of all the people > who have ever submitted an OCA. Mark, According to the OCA FAQ, prior SCA signatories are not required to re-sign the OCA. As a SCA signatory and core contributor to the OpenSolaris community, whom might I contact to get added to "people" list you indicated above? Regards, Mark From Peter.B.Kessler at Oracle.COM Thu Jul 14 21:24:34 2011 From: Peter.B.Kessler at Oracle.COM (Peter B. Kessler) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 14:24:34 -0700 Subject: Oracle Contributor Agreement FAQ? In-Reply-To: <4E1F5C89.8030109@oracle.com> References: <4E160046.3030804@Oracle.COM> <4E1F3131.6000304@oracle.com> <4E1F5B00.1060008@Oracle.COM> <4E1F5C89.8030109@oracle.com> Message-ID: <4E1F5E92.5060109@Oracle.COM> Yes. Sorry. I saw Mark's mail just after I clicked "Send" on my mail. ... peter Donald Smith wrote: > Now you're just trying to rub salt in my clown-nosed wounds :). That is > the list that I thought I saw in Henri's email - this is not current and > will not be kept current, per the thread, for regional privacy reasons. > > - Don > > On 14/07/2011 5:09 PM, Peter B. Kessler wrote: >> Thanks for looking into this. People are allowed to take vacations! >> >> I have a suggestion for the FAQ, if someone is updating it: a pointer >> to the list of Contributor Agreeement signatories[1]. That might be >> of interest to people considering signing the OCA. I don't know if >> it's "frequently asked" for, but it came up on this mailing list just >> today, as the second (as yet unanswered) question from Henri Gomez. >> >> ... peter >> >> [1] http://sca.java.net/CA_signatories.htm >> >> Donald Smith wrote: >>> Peter!!! >>> >>> I am very sorry for not responding sooner. I was out on vacation, >>> took the action to respond and then didn't get back to you. >>> >>> The good news is that we're almost ready to address all these >>> issues. The FAQ is currently being updated, as is the OCA itself. >>> I'll ask that we put a small disclaimer on the links that it's out of >>> date, but should be updated around Aug 1. >>> >>> - Don >>> >>> On 07/07/2011 2:51 PM, Peter B. Kessler wrote: >>>> The OpenJDK legal page[1] contain a reference to (a copy of?) the >>>> Oracle Contributor Agreement[2] (cf. the more central OCA[3]?). >>>> >>>> The OpenJDK legal page also refers to a FAQ for the OCA[4] which >>>> might be same as the more central FAQ[5]. >>>> >>>> By either path, the OCA FAQ contains a bunch of links that are broken: >>>> >>>> - Page 5, the "feedback through email" link points to some place >>>> on www.sun.com that bounces to a generic Oracle and Sun page[6]. >>>> - Page 5, there is a link that says it points to version 1.5 ("in >>>> the interest of transparency"), but which in fact points to the >>>> current version[3], and there claim to be links to versions 1.3[7] >>>> and 1.4[8], neither of which can be found on the oss.oracle.com web >>>> site. >>>> - Page 1 has a link to a different OCA for use by the US >>>> Government[9], which can't be found. >>>> >>>> What would it take to bring these documents up to date? >>>> >>>> ... peter >>>> >>>> [1] http://openjdk.java.net/legal/ >>>> [2] http://openjdk.java.net/legal/oca.pdf >>>> [3] http://oss.oracle.com/oca.pdf >>>> (which redirects to >>>> http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-405177.pdf?) >>>> [4] http://openjdk.java.net/legal/oca-faq.pdf >>>> [5] http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/oca-faq-405384.pdf >>>> [6] http://www.oracle.com/us/sun/index.htm >>>> [7] http://oss.oracle.com/oca-1.3.pdf >>>> [8] http://oss.oracle.com/oca-1.4.pdf >>>> [9] http://oss.oracle.com/government-oca.pdf From kelly.ohair at oracle.com Thu Jul 14 21:26:56 2011 From: kelly.ohair at oracle.com (Kelly O'Hair) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 14:26:56 -0700 Subject: OpenJDK commiters In-Reply-To: <4E1F527F.3000809@oracle.com> References: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> <4E1F467F.9010803@oracle.com> <4E1F527F.3000809@oracle.com> Message-ID: <990697C5-B380-4893-8AEF-D0C880D26386@oracle.com> Ignoring merge changesets, changes before jdk7b22, 'Added tag' changesets, and does not really do justice to people that push non-CR changesets to project repos, you coulkd run this on an openjdk forest: sh ./make/scripts/hgforest.sh "log --no-merges --template '{author} {desc|short}\n'" | fgrep -v 'Added tag' | egrep '^[a-z][a-z0-9]* [0-9][0-9]*:' | cut -d' ' -f1 | sort | uniq -c | sort -n -r -kto On Jul 14, 2011, at 1:33 PM, Donald Smith wrote: > So, I'll put on the "new guy clown nose" here and state that I've conflated your two different questions. > > This list is, in fact, current OpenJDK committers:http://db.openjdk.java.net/people > > (or as current as any kind of such information could be). > > As Roman noted, you can use tools like ohloh if you wanted to get a better indication of how active people are, etc. > > Apologies for any confusion I made in the other thread. > > - Don > > On 14/07/2011 3:41 PM, Donald Smith wrote: >> I understand and sympathize. The issue is related to regional privacy objections, and applies to all the OS projects at Oracle. >> >> In the mid to long term, I would definitely like to see an info page for OpenJDK that describes in more detail where various contributions come from, and also from the perspective of organizations and individuals. In the shorter term, I'll endeavor to create a slide or two for the community to use in situations as you describe (but I apologize, I'm unlikely to get that by tomorrow :) >> >> - Don >> >> On 14/07/2011 3:19 PM, Henri Gomez wrote: >>> May I ask why ? >>> >>> To be short, I've got an interview tomorrow about OpenJDK and one of >>> the expected question is about OpenJDK community, who is involved, how >>> many peoples from big contributors, like Oracle, Redhat, IBM and how >>> many individuals. From neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com Thu Jul 14 21:28:56 2011 From: neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com (Mario Torre) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 23:28:56 +0200 Subject: OpenJDK commiters In-Reply-To: <990697C5-B380-4893-8AEF-D0C880D26386@oracle.com> References: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> <4E1F467F.9010803@oracle.com> <4E1F527F.3000809@oracle.com> <990697C5-B380-4893-8AEF-D0C880D26386@oracle.com> Message-ID: You really used all the Unix tools in this script, cool :) 2011/7/14 Kelly O'Hair : > > Ignoring merge changesets, changes before jdk7b22, 'Added tag' changesets, and does not > really do justice to people that push non-CR changesets to project repos, you coulkd run this on an openjdk forest: > > sh ./make/scripts/hgforest.sh "log --no-merges --template '{author} {desc|short}\n'" | fgrep -v 'Added tag' | egrep '^[a-z][a-z0-9]* [0-9][0-9]*:' | cut -d' ' -f1 | sort | uniq -c | sort -n -r > > -kto > > > On Jul 14, 2011, at 1:33 PM, Donald Smith wrote: > >> So, I'll put on the "new guy clown nose" here and state that I've conflated your two different questions. >> >> This list is, in fact, current OpenJDK committers:http://db.openjdk.java.net/people >> >> (or as current as any kind of such information could be). >> >> As Roman noted, you can use tools like ohloh if you wanted to get a better indication of how active people are, etc. >> >> Apologies for any confusion I made in the other thread. >> >> - Don >> >> On 14/07/2011 3:41 PM, Donald Smith wrote: >>> I understand and sympathize. ?The issue is related to regional privacy objections, and applies to all the OS projects at Oracle. >>> >>> In the mid to long term, I would definitely like to see an info page for OpenJDK that describes in more detail where various contributions come from, and also from the perspective of organizations and individuals. ?In the shorter term, I'll endeavor to create a slide or two for the community to use in situations as you describe (but I apologize, I'm unlikely to get that by tomorrow :) >>> >>> - Don >>> >>> On 14/07/2011 3:19 PM, Henri Gomez wrote: >>>> May I ask why ? >>>> >>>> To be short, I've got an interview tomorrow about OpenJDK and one of >>>> the expected question is about OpenJDK community, who is involved, how >>>> many peoples from big contributors, like Oracle, Redhat, IBM and how >>>> many individuals. > > -- pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA? FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF IcedRobot: www.icedrobot.org Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ Please, support open standards: http://endsoftpatents.org/ From mark.reinhold at oracle.com Thu Jul 14 21:29:16 2011 From: mark.reinhold at oracle.com (mark.reinhold at oracle.com) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 14:29:16 -0700 Subject: OpenJDK committers In-Reply-To: storycrafter@gmail.com; Thu, 14 Jul 2011 16:22:03 CDT; Message-ID: <20110714212916.E53151487@eggemoggin.niobe.net> 2011/7/14 14:22 -0700, storycrafter at gmail.com: > According to the OCA FAQ, prior SCA signatories are not required to > re-sign the OCA. As a SCA signatory and core contributor to the > OpenSolaris community, whom might I contact to get added to "people" > list you indicated above? If you mean the OpenJDK "people" list, then the way to get added to that is in flux since we're in the process of putting the new Bylaws in place. Ultimately getting onto that list will require first being appointed to the Project Author role or being elected a Project Committer or a Group Member per the Bylaws. Just being a Contributor does not get you an OpenJDK user name -- this is different from how OpenSolaris operates. - Mark From ahughes at redhat.com Thu Jul 14 21:31:04 2011 From: ahughes at redhat.com (Dr Andrew John Hughes) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 22:31:04 +0100 Subject: OpenJDK commiters In-Reply-To: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> References: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20110714213104.GA32334@rivendell.middle-earth.co.uk> On 14:48 Thu 14 Jul , Donald Smith wrote: > It's not up to date, and we're no longer planning to publish/update such > a list. > Why? As commits use usernames rather than name/e-mail address to identify committers, this mapping is currently the only way to work out who actually committed something! > - Don > > On 14/07/2011 2:35 PM, Henri Gomez wrote: > > Hi guys, > > > > I'm wondering where I could find an up to date list of OpenJDK commiters. > > I found a list of people here, http://db.openjdk.java.net/people, but > > is it up to date ? > > > > Also did there is a list of people who sign the OCA to contribute to OpenJDK ? > > > > Thanks -- Andrew :) Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) Support Free Java! Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath http://icedtea.classpath.org PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 From ahughes at redhat.com Thu Jul 14 21:32:01 2011 From: ahughes at redhat.com (Dr Andrew John Hughes) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 22:32:01 +0100 Subject: OpenJDK commiters In-Reply-To: <4E1F5035.7010102@oracle.com> References: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> <4E1F467F.9010803@oracle.com> <4E1F4860.3020403@oracle.com> <4E1F5035.7010102@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20110714213201.GB32334@rivendell.middle-earth.co.uk> On 13:23 Thu 14 Jul , Jonathan Gibbons wrote: > On 07/14/2011 01:13 PM, Henri Gomez wrote: > >> Exactly, but you can get the list of committers directly from > >> mercurial, although I'm not sure if we are listed by name, I believe > >> we are only by login name. > > yes, hg log report login names :) > > Use db.openjdk.java.net/people to get from user names to people and > their affiliation, if any. > Which is exactly what they plan to remove... > -- Jon > -- Andrew :) Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) Support Free Java! Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath http://icedtea.classpath.org PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 From ahughes at redhat.com Thu Jul 14 21:33:14 2011 From: ahughes at redhat.com (Dr Andrew John Hughes) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 22:33:14 +0100 Subject: OpenJDK committers In-Reply-To: <20110714210128.0D2251487@eggemoggin.niobe.net> References: <4E1F527F.3000809@oracle.com> <20110714210128.0D2251487@eggemoggin.niobe.net> Message-ID: <20110714213314.GC32334@rivendell.middle-earth.co.uk> On 14:01 Thu 14 Jul , mark.reinhold at oracle.com wrote: > 2011/7/14 13:33 -0700, donald.smith at oracle.com: > > So, I'll put on the "new guy clown nose" here and state that I've conflated > > your two different questions. > > > > This list is, in fact, current OpenJDK > > committers:http://db.openjdk.java.net/people > > > > (or as current as any kind of such information could be). > > Don -- Thanks for clarifying that. > > To expand a bit further, we will continue to publish this list and > its successor lists once the new Bylaws are in place. A fundamental > prerequisite of any open community is transparent information about > the participating individuals and their various roles. > > What Oracle will no longer publish is a global list of all the people > who have ever submitted an OCA. > Oh, that's ok. We do need to know what usernames map to which individuals. > - Mark -- Andrew :) Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) Support Free Java! Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath http://icedtea.classpath.org PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 From ahughes at redhat.com Thu Jul 14 21:33:53 2011 From: ahughes at redhat.com (Dr Andrew John Hughes) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 22:33:53 +0100 Subject: SAP joins the OpenJDK In-Reply-To: <2F00A00719472747B614F605D18F7D5E1BDFBA19FC@DEWDFECCR03.wdf.sap.corp> References: <2F00A00719472747B614F605D18F7D5E1BDFBA19FC@DEWDFECCR03.wdf.sap.corp> Message-ID: <20110714213353.GD32334@rivendell.middle-earth.co.uk> On 17:32 Thu 14 Jul , Simonis, Volker wrote: > Dear all, > > I'm really happy that as of today, SAP has signed the Oracle > Contributor Agreement (OCA). This means that with immediate effect the > SAP JVM developers can officially join the discussions on the various > OpenJDK mailing lists and contribute patches and enhancements to the > project. > > SAP is a long time Sun and now Oracle Java source licensee who has > ported the original Sun (now Oracle) JDK to all the 14 SAP supported > platforms (including the Oracle supported Linux/Windows/Solaris > platforms plus Win/IA64, AS400/PPC64, HPUX/PARISC, HPUX/IA64, > Linux/IA64, Linux/PPC64, Linux/S390, AIX/PPC64). > > I'm sure this move will be fruitful and beneficial for both, the > OpenJDK community as well as SAP. > > Looking forward to working with you, > Volker Simonis and the whole SAP JVM team > So will SAP be contributing some of these ports to OpenJDK? -- Andrew :) Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) Support Free Java! Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath http://icedtea.classpath.org PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 From henri.gomez at gmail.com Thu Jul 14 21:34:42 2011 From: henri.gomez at gmail.com (Henri Gomez) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2011 23:34:42 +0200 Subject: OpenJDK commiters In-Reply-To: <990697C5-B380-4893-8AEF-D0C880D26386@oracle.com> References: <4E1F39FF.9080502@oracle.com> <4E1F467F.9010803@oracle.com> <4E1F527F.3000809@oracle.com> <990697C5-B380-4893-8AEF-D0C880D26386@oracle.com> Message-ID: > Ignoring merge changesets, changes before jdk7b22, 'Added tag' changesets, and does not > really do justice to people that push non-CR changesets to project repos, you coulkd run this on an openjdk forest: > > sh ./make/scripts/hgforest.sh "log --no-merges --template '{author} {desc|short}\n'" | fgrep -v 'Added tag' | egrep '^[a-z][a-z0-9]* [0-9][0-9]*:' | cut -d' ' -f1 | sort | uniq -c | sort -n -r Superb ! bash powo ! From leegold at operamail.com Thu Jul 21 06:53:53 2011 From: leegold at operamail.com (Lee Gold) Date: Wed, 20 Jul 2011 23:53:53 -0700 Subject: How to get a java plugin manually installed in Firefox, using ubuntu? Message-ID: <1311231233.28160.2154193101@webmail.messagingengine.com> Hi, using Uubuntu 11.04 I don't like Firefox 4 and 5 so I uninstalled it and installed FF 3.6.19 manually in the /opt directory. It works really well. I wanted to add a java icedtea plugin to FF. But I can't use Synaptics (the package installer). Synaptics does not see the FF 3.6.19 - it does not know it's there (because I manually installed FF 3.6.19) and will try an install FF5 if I use it (synaptic) to install the icetea plugin - makes sense it would do that - it thinks no FF is installed How do I get a java plugin installed considering how FF is implemented on my system? I have tried getting a .so icetea plugin and using a link from the .so file to where I think it should be in the FF directory, but no luck. Thanks, Lee G. -- http://www.fastmail.fm - IMAP accessible web-mail From ahughes at redhat.com Thu Jul 21 13:25:50 2011 From: ahughes at redhat.com (Dr Andrew John Hughes) Date: Thu, 21 Jul 2011 14:25:50 +0100 Subject: How to get a java plugin manually installed in Firefox, using ubuntu? In-Reply-To: <1311231233.28160.2154193101@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <1311231233.28160.2154193101@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <20110721132550.GS32327@rivendell.middle-earth.co.uk> On 23:53 Wed 20 Jul , Lee Gold wrote: > > > > Hi, using Uubuntu 11.04 > > I don't like Firefox 4 and 5 so I uninstalled it and installed FF 3.6.19 > manually in the /opt directory. It works really well. I wanted to add a > java icedtea plugin to FF. But I can't use Synaptics (the package > installer). Synaptics does not see the FF 3.6.19 - it does not know it's > there (because I manually installed FF 3.6.19) and will try an install > FF5 if I use it (synaptic) to install the icetea plugin - makes sense it > would do that - it thinks no FF is installed > > How do I get a java plugin installed considering how FF is implemented > on my system? > > I have tried getting a .so icetea plugin and using a link from the .so > file to where I think it should be in the FF directory, but no luck. > [Ccing distro-pkg-dev where work on IcedTea-Web is discussed] You'll need to build your own version of IcedTea-Web: http://dbhole.wordpress.com/2011/07/20/icedtea-web-1-0-4-and-1-1-1-security-releases-released/ against the Firefox installed in /opt which uses xulrunner 1.9. The version with 4 & 5 will use xulrunner 2 and so presumably won't work with FF 3.6.x. I imagine you'll need to set PKG_CONFIG_PATH to the location of the *.pc files in your /opt installed Mozilla so IcedTea-Web's build picks it up. > Thanks, > > Lee G. > > -- > http://www.fastmail.fm - IMAP accessible web-mail > -- Andrew :) Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) Support Free Java! Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath http://icedtea.classpath.org PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 From patrick at reini.net Fri Jul 22 09:34:24 2011 From: patrick at reini.net (Patrick Reinhart) Date: Fri, 22 Jul 2011 11:34:24 +0200 Subject: What mailing list ist the correct for JDBC related stuff? Message-ID: <20110722113424.13553mldp59v0mcg@webmail.nine.ch> Hi there, I just got some trouble finding the correct mailing list for JDBC related questions. Can someone help me getting the correct one or am I completely wrong here? Patrick From openjdk at gatworks.com Sun Jul 24 22:44:22 2011 From: openjdk at gatworks.com (Uncle George) Date: Sun, 24 Jul 2011 18:44:22 -0400 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: <1310067123.4394.1.camel@galactica> References: <4e0e453a.dc97d80a.15ce.ffffc76c@mx.google.com> <1310067123.4394.1.camel@galactica> Message-ID: <4E2CA046.2030801@gatworks.com> On 07/07/2011 03:32 PM, Mario Torre wrote: > Il giorno sab, 02/07/2011 alle 00.07 +0200, > neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com ha scritto: >> I will not have access to a computer until Monday, but you are right, >> we should update the docs if they are still pointing to the old >> requirement. I'll prepare a patch when I'm back on Monday if nobody >> else does it before me. >> >> Mario > Which brings now an interesting question... > > Where are the sources of those docs located? > Still not updated! I suppose its hard to join in such matters if one cannot get the sources to build. From kelly.ohair at oracle.com Mon Jul 25 16:41:00 2011 From: kelly.ohair at oracle.com (Kelly O'Hair) Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 09:41:00 -0700 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: <4E2CA046.2030801@gatworks.com> References: <4e0e453a.dc97d80a.15ce.ffffc76c@mx.google.com> <1310067123.4394.1.camel@galactica> <4E2CA046.2030801@gatworks.com> Message-ID: On Jul 24, 2011, at 3:44 PM, Uncle George wrote: > On 07/07/2011 03:32 PM, Mario Torre wrote: >> Il giorno sab, 02/07/2011 alle 00.07 +0200, >> neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com ha scritto: >>> I will not have access to a computer until Monday, but you are right, >>> we should update the docs if they are still pointing to the old >>> requirement. I'll prepare a patch when I'm back on Monday if nobody >>> else does it before me. >>> >>> Mario >> Which brings now an interesting question... >> >> Where are the sources of those docs located? >> > > Still not updated! I suppose its hard to join in such matters if one cannot get the sources to build. I'll send a webrev on changing the pages regarding the Forest Extension to the build-dev alias. Making the source of these pages public is a separate issue that I will look into, and I think it may be time for the Developer Guide to be completely reviewed. In practice, developers rarely need to deal with the entire forest, the guide needs to focus more on the changes to a single repository, in my opinion anyway. -kto From neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com Mon Jul 25 17:03:13 2011 From: neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com (Mario Torre) Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 19:03:13 +0200 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: References: <4e0e453a.dc97d80a.15ce.ffffc76c@mx.google.com> <1310067123.4394.1.camel@galactica> <4E2CA046.2030801@gatworks.com> Message-ID: 2011/7/25 Kelly O'Hair : > > On Jul 24, 2011, at 3:44 PM, Uncle George wrote: > >> On 07/07/2011 03:32 PM, Mario Torre wrote: >>> Il giorno sab, 02/07/2011 alle 00.07 +0200, >>> neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com ha scritto: >>>> I will not have access to a computer until Monday, but you are right, >>>> we should update the docs if they are still pointing to the old >>>> requirement. I'll prepare a patch when I'm back on Monday if nobody >>>> else does it before me. >>>> >>>> Mario >>> Which brings now an interesting question... >>> >>> Where are the sources of those docs located? >>> >> >> Still not updated! I suppose its hard to join in such matters if one cannot get the sources to build. @Uncle George: There has been a short followup, but I think it went on the web-discuss mailing list. In any case, the source root already contains the right pointers, both in the README and in the README-builds.html files: """ This one root repository can be obtained with something like: hg clone http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7 openjdk7 To make sure you have all the nested repositories, you can run: cd openjdk7 && sh ./get_source.sh """ It's true that the online docs should contains those pointers as well, though. > I'll send a webrev on changing the pages regarding the Forest Extension to the build-dev alias. > > Making the source of these pages public is a separate issue that I will look into, and I think > it may be time for the Developer Guide to be completely reviewed. > In practice, developers rarely need to deal with the entire forest, the guide needs to focus more > on the changes to a single repository, in my opinion anyway. Hi Kelly, This is a good news and very welcomed! I would also like to amend the README files, so that every reference to the forest disappears, what do you think? Cheers, Mario -- pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA? FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF IcedRobot: www.icedrobot.org Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ Please, support open standards: http://endsoftpatents.org/ From kelly.ohair at oracle.com Mon Jul 25 17:06:44 2011 From: kelly.ohair at oracle.com (Kelly O'Hair) Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 10:06:44 -0700 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: References: <4e0e453a.dc97d80a.15ce.ffffc76c@mx.google.com> <1310067123.4394.1.camel@galactica> <4E2CA046.2030801@gatworks.com> Message-ID: <6AB6C50C-810E-41B6-91BF-45368C08F279@oracle.com> On Jul 25, 2011, at 10:03 AM, Mario Torre wrote: > I would also like to amend the README files, so that every reference > to the forest disappears, what do you think? I thought that was already done. What README files are we talking about? -kto From neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com Mon Jul 25 17:13:55 2011 From: neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com (Mario Torre) Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 19:13:55 +0200 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: <6AB6C50C-810E-41B6-91BF-45368C08F279@oracle.com> References: <4e0e453a.dc97d80a.15ce.ffffc76c@mx.google.com> <1310067123.4394.1.camel@galactica> <4E2CA046.2030801@gatworks.com> <6AB6C50C-810E-41B6-91BF-45368C08F279@oracle.com> Message-ID: 2011/7/25 Kelly O'Hair : > > On Jul 25, 2011, at 10:03 AM, Mario Torre wrote: > > I would also like to amend the README files, so that every reference > to the forest disappears, what do you think? > > I thought that was already done. > What README files are we talking about? The README and README-builds.html: http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8/file/8da980eedab6/README http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8/file/8da980eedab6/README-builds.html Specifically: """ This is identical to using the Mercurial Forest Extension command 'hg fclone http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7 openjdk7 """ Cheers, Mario -- pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA? FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF IcedRobot: www.icedrobot.org Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ Please, support open standards: http://endsoftpatents.org/ From mark.reinhold at oracle.com Mon Jul 25 17:45:37 2011 From: mark.reinhold at oracle.com (mark.reinhold at oracle.com) Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 10:45:37 -0700 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: kelly.ohair@oracle.com; Mon, 25 Jul 2011 10:06:44 PDT; <6AB6C50C-810E-41B6-91BF-45368C08F279@oracle.com> Message-ID: <20110725174537.DA74B1381@eggemoggin.niobe.net> 2011/7/25 10:06 -0700, kelly.ohair at oracle.com: > On Jul 25, 2011, at 10:03 AM, Mario Torre wrote: >> I would also like to amend the README files, so that every reference >> to the forest disappears, what do you think? > > I thought that was already done. I don't understand why people are so eager to wipe out all references to the forest extension. It's a bit clunky, I agree, and the original author doesn't maintain it any more, but one Michael Tharp is maintaining a fork here: https://bitbucket.org/gxti/hgforest I use this on a daily basis and it works fine. Until and unless we replace the forest extension with something better than a shell script I suggest we refer people to this version as a viable alternative. - Mark From mark at klomp.org Mon Jul 25 18:41:53 2011 From: mark at klomp.org (Mark Wielaard) Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 20:41:53 +0200 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: <20110725174537.DA74B1381@eggemoggin.niobe.net> References: <20110725174537.DA74B1381@eggemoggin.niobe.net> Message-ID: <1311619313.3322.35.camel@springer.wildebeest.org> On Mon, 2011-07-25 at 10:45 -0700, mark.reinhold at oracle.com wrote: > 2011/7/25 10:06 -0700, kelly.ohair at oracle.com: > > On Jul 25, 2011, at 10:03 AM, Mario Torre wrote: > >> I would also like to amend the README files, so that every reference > >> to the forest disappears, what do you think? > > > > I thought that was already done. > > I don't understand why people are so eager to wipe out all references > to the forest extension. > > It's a bit clunky, I agree, and the original author doesn't maintain > it any more, but one Michael Tharp is maintaining a fork here: > > https://bitbucket.org/gxti/hgforest > > I use this on a daily basis and it works fine. Until and unless we > replace the forest extension with something better than a shell script > I suggest we refer people to this version as a viable alternative. IcedTea also maintains a version, based on the above, plus some changes from https://bitbucket.org/pmezard/hgforest-crew and a few fixes so the server side http hg protocol works against hg version 1.8 (which is what the icedtea server is running): http://icedtea.classpath.org/hg/hgforest Cheers, Mark From kelly.ohair at oracle.com Mon Jul 25 19:55:47 2011 From: kelly.ohair at oracle.com (Kelly O'Hair) Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 12:55:47 -0700 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: <20110725174537.DA74B1381@eggemoggin.niobe.net> References: <20110725174537.DA74B1381@eggemoggin.niobe.net> Message-ID: On Jul 25, 2011, at 10:45 AM, mark.reinhold at oracle.com wrote: > 2011/7/25 10:06 -0700, kelly.ohair at oracle.com: >> On Jul 25, 2011, at 10:03 AM, Mario Torre wrote: >>> I would also like to amend the README files, so that every reference >>> to the forest disappears, what do you think? >> >> I thought that was already done. > > I don't understand why people are so eager to wipe out all references > to the forest extension. > > It's a bit clunky, I agree, and the original author doesn't maintain > it any more, but one Michael Tharp is maintaining a fork here: > > https://bitbucket.org/gxti/hgforest > > I use this on a daily basis and it works fine. Until and unless we > replace the forest extension with something better than a shell script > I suggest we refer people to this version as a viable alternative. It broke with 1.8 and is broken again with 1.9. Each breakage creates pains for multiple people and it is just a pain in my view. Hopefully we will have a better alternative than a shell script soon, and when that happens I'll re-adjust the Dev Guide to use that extension, although I do think the Dev Guide spent too much time talking about forests than it should have. Most developers work in one repository, and I think the guide should try and focus on that. -kto > > - Mark From neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com Mon Jul 25 20:17:56 2011 From: neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com (Mario Torre) Date: Mon, 25 Jul 2011 22:17:56 +0200 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: References: <20110725174537.DA74B1381@eggemoggin.niobe.net> Message-ID: <1311625078.4501.8.camel@galactica> Il giorno lun, 25/07/2011 alle 12.55 -0700, Kelly O'Hair ha scritto: > On Jul 25, 2011, at 10:45 AM, mark.reinhold at oracle.com wrote: > > > 2011/7/25 10:06 -0700, kelly.ohair at oracle.com: > >> On Jul 25, 2011, at 10:03 AM, Mario Torre wrote: > >>> I would also like to amend the README files, so that every reference > >>> to the forest disappears, what do you think? > >> > >> I thought that was already done. > > > > I don't understand why people are so eager to wipe out all references > > to the forest extension. > > > > It's a bit clunky, I agree, and the original author doesn't maintain > > it any more, but one Michael Tharp is maintaining a fork here: > > > > https://bitbucket.org/gxti/hgforest > > > > I use this on a daily basis and it works fine. Until and unless we > > replace the forest extension with something better than a shell script > > I suggest we refer people to this version as a viable alternative. > > It broke with 1.8 and is broken again with 1.9. Each breakage creates pains > for multiple people and it is just a pain in my view. > > Hopefully we will have a better alternative than a shell script soon, and when > that happens I'll re-adjust the Dev Guide to use that extension, although I do think > the Dev Guide spent too much time talking about forests than it should have. > Most developers work in one repository, and I think the guide should try and focus on that. > > -kto > Honestly, to Kelly's point, I would say that forest should not be a mandatory feature, and although the script is less nice that the forest extension, the fact that this breaks from time to time is indeed irritating, especially since mercurial is released quite often, and we only maintain it for some very specific version of hg (usually the latest, as this is what we get from the Linux distributions we Free Software hippies tend to use), so we leave out all the other people that for one reason or another don't updated. I still think we should support forests, but not to the point to make them mandatory and spend so much words in the documentation, especially (and this was the point of the original post), since our links are outdated. Well, that's just my point of view, that is :) Cheers, Mario From ahughes at redhat.com Tue Jul 26 02:35:02 2011 From: ahughes at redhat.com (Dr Andrew John Hughes) Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 03:35:02 +0100 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: <1311625078.4501.8.camel@galactica> References: <20110725174537.DA74B1381@eggemoggin.niobe.net> <1311625078.4501.8.camel@galactica> Message-ID: <20110726023502.GK17692@rivendell.middle-earth.co.uk> On 22:17 Mon 25 Jul , Mario Torre wrote: > Il giorno lun, 25/07/2011 alle 12.55 -0700, Kelly O'Hair ha scritto: > > On Jul 25, 2011, at 10:45 AM, mark.reinhold at oracle.com wrote: > > > > > 2011/7/25 10:06 -0700, kelly.ohair at oracle.com: > > >> On Jul 25, 2011, at 10:03 AM, Mario Torre wrote: > > >>> I would also like to amend the README files, so that every reference > > >>> to the forest disappears, what do you think? > > >> > > >> I thought that was already done. > > > > > > I don't understand why people are so eager to wipe out all references > > > to the forest extension. > > > > > > It's a bit clunky, I agree, and the original author doesn't maintain > > > it any more, but one Michael Tharp is maintaining a fork here: > > > > > > https://bitbucket.org/gxti/hgforest > > > > > > I use this on a daily basis and it works fine. Until and unless we > > > replace the forest extension with something better than a shell script > > > I suggest we refer people to this version as a viable alternative. > > > > It broke with 1.8 and is broken again with 1.9. Each breakage creates pains > > for multiple people and it is just a pain in my view. > > > > Hopefully we will have a better alternative than a shell script soon, and when > > that happens I'll re-adjust the Dev Guide to use that extension, although I do think > > the Dev Guide spent too much time talking about forests than it should have. > > Most developers work in one repository, and I think the guide should try and focus on that. > > > > -kto > > > > Honestly, to Kelly's point, I would say that forest should not be a > mandatory feature, and although the script is less nice that the forest > extension, the fact that this breaks from time to time is indeed > irritating, especially since mercurial is released quite often, and we > only maintain it for some very specific version of hg (usually the > latest, as this is what we get from the Linux distributions we Free > Software hippies tend to use), so we leave out all the other people that > for one reason or another don't updated. > > I still think we should support forests, but not to the point to make > them mandatory and spend so much words in the documentation, especially > (and this was the point of the original post), since our links are > outdated. Well, that's just my point of view, that is :) > Not only does it break regularly as it's not part of the upstream Mercurial project, but the forest extension is slow. I moved away from it in preference of my own shell scripts while it still worked and to no apparent disadvantage. Exactly what is the benefit of it? > Cheers, > Mario > > > > -- Andrew :) Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) Support Free Java! Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath http://icedtea.classpath.org PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 From mohan.pakkurti at oracle.com Tue Jul 26 15:35:39 2011 From: mohan.pakkurti at oracle.com (Mohan Pakkurti) Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 17:35:39 +0200 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: <20110726023502.GK17692@rivendell.middle-earth.co.uk> References: <20110725174537.DA74B1381@eggemoggin.niobe.net> <1311625078.4501.8.camel@galactica> <20110726023502.GK17692@rivendell.middle-earth.co.uk> Message-ID: >>> It broke with 1.8 and is broken again with 1.9. Each breakage creates pains >>> for multiple people and it is just a pain in my view. >>> >>> Hopefully we will have a better alternative than a shell script soon, and when >>> that happens I'll re-adjust the Dev Guide to use that extension, although I do think >>> the Dev Guide spent too much time talking about forests than it should have. >>> Most developers work in one repository, and I think the guide should try and focus on that. >>> >>> -kto >>> >> >> Honestly, to Kelly's point, I would say that forest should not be a >> mandatory feature, and although the script is less nice that the forest >> extension, the fact that this breaks from time to time is indeed >> irritating, especially since mercurial is released quite often, and we >> only maintain it for some very specific version of hg (usually the >> latest, as this is what we get from the Linux distributions we Free >> Software hippies tend to use), so we leave out all the other people that >> for one reason or another don't updated. >> >> I still think we should support forests, but not to the point to make >> them mandatory and spend so much words in the documentation, especially >> (and this was the point of the original post), since our links are >> outdated. Well, that's just my point of view, that is :) >> > > Not only does it break regularly as it's not part of the upstream Mercurial project, > but the forest extension is slow. I moved away from it in preference of my own shell > scripts while it still worked and to no apparent disadvantage. Exactly what is the > benefit of it? > There is no benefit. No one has gotten around to owning and supporting a proper replacement for the forest extension and we need that functionality because of the way the repositories are organized and relate to each other. Alternatives to the forest extension (subrepos) have been discussed and they usually end up in heated exchanges. We could gain a lot by revisiting the design of our repositories and workflows so that we can continue to work as we do today and in addition allow elementary operations, like tracking changes to the entire collection of repositories. I would support such an effort, instead of periodically having to address issues caused by using a deprecated feature in the source control system. >> Cheers, >> Mario > > -- > Andrew :) > > Free Java Software Engineer > Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) > > Support Free Java! > Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea > http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath > http://icedtea.classpath.org > PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) > Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 From neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com Tue Jul 26 15:47:13 2011 From: neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com (Mario Torre) Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 17:47:13 +0200 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: <589D37EA-2192-41F0-BB14-21115772DA00@oracle.com> References: <4e0e453a.dc97d80a.15ce.ffffc76c@mx.google.com> <1310067123.4394.1.camel@galactica> <4E2CA046.2030801@gatworks.com> <6AB6C50C-810E-41B6-91BF-45368C08F279@oracle.com> <5C722A5A-1CB6-4719-9628-4D1B17EDDA4B@oracle.com> <589D37EA-2192-41F0-BB14-21115772DA00@oracle.com> Message-ID: 2011/7/25 Kelly O'Hair : > > On Jul 25, 2011, at 10:21 AM, Mario Torre wrote: > >> 2011/7/25 Kelly O'Hair : >>> Yeah, I suspect we should just delete these lines for now. >>> >>> -kto >> >> I can take care of this if you want. > > that would be great. > > -kto I created a bug report on the OpenJDK bugzilla: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/show_bug.cgi?id=100196 And a webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~neugens/100196/webrev/ The patch also updates the jdk7 references to point to jdk8 (I created this patch for the jdk8 branch). The bug takes web as component, because this is where the rest of the documentation is, I was unsure if this should have been part of the build scripts instead though. Cheers, Mario -- pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA? FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF IcedRobot: www.icedrobot.org Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ Please, support open standards: http://endsoftpatents.org/ From neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com Tue Jul 26 16:18:48 2011 From: neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com (Mario Torre) Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 18:18:48 +0200 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: References: <20110725174537.DA74B1381@eggemoggin.niobe.net> <1311625078.4501.8.camel@galactica> <20110726023502.GK17692@rivendell.middle-earth.co.uk> Message-ID: 2011/7/26 Mohan Pakkurti : >> Not only does it break regularly as it's not part of the upstream Mercurial project, >> but the forest extension is slow. ?I moved away from it in preference of my own shell >> scripts while it still worked and to no apparent disadvantage. ?Exactly what is the >> benefit of it? >> > > There is no benefit. No one has gotten around to owning and supporting a proper replacement for the forest extension and we need that functionality because of the way the repositories are organized and relate to each other. > > Alternatives to the forest extension ?(subrepos) have been discussed and they usually end up in heated exchanges. > > We could gain a lot by revisiting the design of our repositories and workflows so that we can continue to work as we do today and in addition allow elementary operations, like tracking changes to the entire collection of repositories. > > I would support such an effort, instead of periodically having to address issues caused by using a deprecated feature in the source control system. Yeah, I understand this is handy, but I started to not rely on it since forest got deprecated the first time. Some of our developers started to complain because they lost the forest, they were the same that complained before we introduced the forest ;) so you can never make everybody happy! But to be honest, I think Kelly's script is quite good for almost everything you want to do on the forest, and I agree most of the time you end up working on a "simple" sub project, not the whole forest anyway. Cheers, Mario -- pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA? FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF IcedRobot: www.icedrobot.org Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ Please, support open standards: http://endsoftpatents.org/ From dalibor.topic at oracle.com Tue Jul 26 21:47:52 2011 From: dalibor.topic at oracle.com (Dalibor Topic) Date: Tue, 26 Jul 2011 14:47:52 -0700 Subject: What mailing list ist the correct for JDBC related stuff? In-Reply-To: <20110722113424.13553mldp59v0mcg@webmail.nine.ch> References: <20110722113424.13553mldp59v0mcg@webmail.nine.ch> Message-ID: <4E2F3608.40705@oracle.com> On 7/22/11 2:34 AM, Patrick Reinhart wrote: > Hi there, > > I just got some trouble finding the correct mailing list for JDBC related questions. Can someone help me getting the correct one or am I completely wrong here? core-libs-dev sounds like a good choice. cheers, dalibor topic -- Oracle Dalibor Topic | Java F/OSS Ambassador Phone: +494023646738 | Mobile: +491772664192 Oracle Java Platform Group ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Nagelsweg 55 | 20097 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: J?rgen Kunz, Marcel van de Molen, Alexander van der Ven Green Oracle Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From weijun.wang at oracle.com Wed Jul 27 04:52:12 2011 From: weijun.wang at oracle.com (Weijun Wang) Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 12:52:12 +0800 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: References: <4e0e453a.dc97d80a.15ce.ffffc76c@mx.google.com> <1310067123.4394.1.camel@galactica> <4E2CA046.2030801@gatworks.com> <6AB6C50C-810E-41B6-91BF-45368C08F279@oracle.com> <5C722A5A-1CB6-4719-9628-4D1B17EDDA4B@oracle.com> <589D37EA-2192-41F0-BB14-21115772DA00@oracle.com> Message-ID: <4E2F997C.7000509@oracle.com> On 07/26/2011 11:47 PM, Mario Torre wrote: > 2011/7/25 Kelly O'Hair: >> >> On Jul 25, 2011, at 10:21 AM, Mario Torre wrote: >> >>> 2011/7/25 Kelly O'Hair: >>>> Yeah, I suspect we should just delete these lines for now. >>>> >>>> -kto >>> >>> I can take care of this if you want. >> >> that would be great. >> >> -kto > > I created a bug report on the OpenJDK bugzilla: > > https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/show_bug.cgi?id=100196 > > And a webrev: > > http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~neugens/100196/webrev/ > > The patch also updates the jdk7 references to point to jdk8 (I created > this patch for the jdk8 branch). Then maybe you should also change BOOTDIR to jdk7. Thanks Max > > The bug takes web as component, because this is where the rest of the > documentation is, I was unsure if this should have been part of the > build scripts instead though. > > Cheers, > Mario From kelly.ohair at oracle.com Wed Jul 27 15:27:57 2011 From: kelly.ohair at oracle.com (Kelly O'Hair) Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 08:27:57 -0700 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: <4E2F997C.7000509@oracle.com> References: <4e0e453a.dc97d80a.15ce.ffffc76c@mx.google.com> <1310067123.4394.1.camel@galactica> <4E2CA046.2030801@gatworks.com> <6AB6C50C-810E-41B6-91BF-45368C08F279@oracle.com> <5C722A5A-1CB6-4719-9628-4D1B17EDDA4B@oracle.com> <589D37EA-2192-41F0-BB14-21115772DA00@oracle.com> <4E2F997C.7000509@oracle.com> Message-ID: On Jul 26, 2011, at 9:52 PM, Weijun Wang wrote: > > Then maybe you should also change BOOTDIR to jdk7. > Good catch, yes the BOOT jdk MUST be jdk7 now, jdk6 will not work due to the jdk7 features being added to the jdk8 sources. -kto > Thanks > Max From neugens at limasoftware.net Wed Jul 27 15:47:28 2011 From: neugens at limasoftware.net (Mario Torre) Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 17:47:28 +0200 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: References: <4e0e453a.dc97d80a.15ce.ffffc76c@mx.google.com> <1310067123.4394.1.camel@galactica> <4E2CA046.2030801@gatworks.com> <6AB6C50C-810E-41B6-91BF-45368C08F279@oracle.com> <5C722A5A-1CB6-4719-9628-4D1B17EDDA4B@oracle.com> <589D37EA-2192-41F0-BB14-21115772DA00@oracle.com> <4E2F997C.7000509@oracle.com> Message-ID: <1311781667.2830.7.camel@galactica> Il giorno mer, 27/07/2011 alle 08.27 -0700, Kelly O'Hair ha scritto: > On Jul 26, 2011, at 9:52 PM, Weijun Wang wrote: > > > > > Then maybe you should also change BOOTDIR to jdk7. > > > > Good catch, yes the BOOT jdk MUST be jdk7 now, jdk6 will not work due to the > jdk7 features being added to the jdk8 sources. Right, I will amend this (my change were documentation only so far though) but this is not too early now? I think jdk8 can still build with jdk6 at this point, because no new features have been added yet that prevent it to work, or am I wrong? Cheers, Mario From kelly.ohair at oracle.com Wed Jul 27 15:57:22 2011 From: kelly.ohair at oracle.com (Kelly O'Hair) Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 08:57:22 -0700 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: <1311781667.2830.7.camel@galactica> References: <4e0e453a.dc97d80a.15ce.ffffc76c@mx.google.com> <1310067123.4394.1.camel@galactica> <4E2CA046.2030801@gatworks.com> <6AB6C50C-810E-41B6-91BF-45368C08F279@oracle.com> <5C722A5A-1CB6-4719-9628-4D1B17EDDA4B@oracle.com> <589D37EA-2192-41F0-BB14-21115772DA00@oracle.com> <4E2F997C.7000509@oracle.com> <1311781667.2830.7.camel@galactica> Message-ID: On Jul 27, 2011, at 8:47 AM, Mario Torre wrote: > Il giorno mer, 27/07/2011 alle 08.27 -0700, Kelly O'Hair ha scritto: >> On Jul 26, 2011, at 9:52 PM, Weijun Wang wrote: >> >>> >>> Then maybe you should also change BOOTDIR to jdk7. >>> >> >> Good catch, yes the BOOT jdk MUST be jdk7 now, jdk6 will not work due to the >> jdk7 features being added to the jdk8 sources. > > Right, I will amend this (my change were documentation only so far > though) but this is not too early now? Not too early. > > I think jdk8 can still build with jdk6 at this point, because no new > features have been added yet that prevent it to work, or am I wrong? Maybe the changes haven't hit the master yet, or the jdk8/build forest, but they are in the jdk8/tl forest. The java buildtools are starting to use the jdk7 language features, and these are built with the boot jdk. And I suspect that langtools has started to use the jdk7 language features too, which also needs to be built with the boot jdk. So if jdk6 can be used now, that will not last long. -kto > > Cheers, > Mario > From neugens at limasoftware.net Wed Jul 27 21:37:35 2011 From: neugens at limasoftware.net (Mario Torre) Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 23:37:35 +0200 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: References: <4e0e453a.dc97d80a.15ce.ffffc76c@mx.google.com> <1310067123.4394.1.camel@galactica> <4E2CA046.2030801@gatworks.com> <6AB6C50C-810E-41B6-91BF-45368C08F279@oracle.com> <5C722A5A-1CB6-4719-9628-4D1B17EDDA4B@oracle.com> <589D37EA-2192-41F0-BB14-21115772DA00@oracle.com> <4E2F997C.7000509@oracle.com> <1311781667.2830.7.camel@galactica> Message-ID: 2011/7/27 Kelly O'Hair : > > On Jul 27, 2011, at 8:47 AM, Mario Torre wrote: > >> Il giorno mer, 27/07/2011 alle 08.27 -0700, Kelly O'Hair ha scritto: >>> On Jul 26, 2011, at 9:52 PM, Weijun Wang wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Then maybe you should also change BOOTDIR to jdk7. >>>> >>> >>> Good catch, yes the BOOT jdk MUST be jdk7 now, jdk6 will not work due to the >>> jdk7 features being added to the jdk8 sources. >> >> Right, I will amend this (my change were documentation only so far >> though) but this is not too early now? > > Not too early. > >> >> I think jdk8 can still build with jdk6 at this point, because no new >> features have been added yet that prevent it to work, or am I wrong? > > Maybe the changes haven't hit the master yet, or the jdk8/build forest, but they are in the jdk8/tl > forest. > > The java buildtools are starting to use the jdk7 language features, and these are built with the boot > jdk. And I suspect that langtools has started to use the jdk7 language features too, which also needs > to be built with the boot jdk. > So if jdk6 can be used now, that will not last long. > > -kto Ok, so we need to fix it quick then :) I searched the occurrences of BOOTDIR, it's defined directly only in a couple of places in the Makefiles. One is in fact documentation, the other is this: jdk/make/Makefile:193: $(MAKE) ALT_BOOTDIR=/opt/java/jdk1.6.0 \n\ A patch for this is trivial, but the occurrences in the README files are a bit trickier, for example: """ After installing Fedora 9 you need to install several build dependencies. The simplest way to do it is to execute the following commands as user root:

yum-builddep java-1.6.0-openjdk

yum install gcc gcc-c++

""" That would be yum-builddep java-1.7.0-openjdk then. Now, in Fedora 15 there's no java-1.7.0-openjdk, so I doubt that there is one in Fedora 9 (which is long time unsupported). Wouldn't make sense to rewrite this part of the guide completely then to reflect more recent distributions and guidelines? In any case, in this moment with jdk7 soon to be the requirment for jdk8, I think that the only way to build the jdk8 would be by first building the jdk7 in most situation. What do you think? Cheers, Mario -- pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA? FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ Please, support open standards: http://endsoftpatents.org/ From kelly.ohair at oracle.com Wed Jul 27 21:50:19 2011 From: kelly.ohair at oracle.com (Kelly O'Hair) Date: Wed, 27 Jul 2011 14:50:19 -0700 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: References: <4e0e453a.dc97d80a.15ce.ffffc76c@mx.google.com> <1310067123.4394.1.camel@galactica> <4E2CA046.2030801@gatworks.com> <6AB6C50C-810E-41B6-91BF-45368C08F279@oracle.com> <5C722A5A-1CB6-4719-9628-4D1B17EDDA4B@oracle.com> <589D37EA-2192-41F0-BB14-21115772DA00@oracle.com> <4E2F997C.7000509@oracle.com> <1311781667.2830.7.camel@galactica> Message-ID: On Jul 27, 2011, at 2:37 PM, Mario Torre wrote: > 2011/7/27 Kelly O'Hair : >> >> On Jul 27, 2011, at 8:47 AM, Mario Torre wrote: >> >>> Il giorno mer, 27/07/2011 alle 08.27 -0700, Kelly O'Hair ha scritto: >>>> On Jul 26, 2011, at 9:52 PM, Weijun Wang wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Then maybe you should also change BOOTDIR to jdk7. >>>>> >>>> >>>> Good catch, yes the BOOT jdk MUST be jdk7 now, jdk6 will not work due to the >>>> jdk7 features being added to the jdk8 sources. >>> >>> Right, I will amend this (my change were documentation only so far >>> though) but this is not too early now? >> >> Not too early. >> >>> >>> I think jdk8 can still build with jdk6 at this point, because no new >>> features have been added yet that prevent it to work, or am I wrong? >> >> Maybe the changes haven't hit the master yet, or the jdk8/build forest, but they are in the jdk8/tl >> forest. >> >> The java buildtools are starting to use the jdk7 language features, and these are built with the boot >> jdk. And I suspect that langtools has started to use the jdk7 language features too, which also needs >> to be built with the boot jdk. >> So if jdk6 can be used now, that will not last long. >> >> -kto > > Ok, so we need to fix it quick then :) > > I searched the occurrences of BOOTDIR, it's defined directly only in a > couple of places in the Makefiles. > > One is in fact documentation, the other is this: > > jdk/make/Makefile:193: $(MAKE) ALT_BOOTDIR=/opt/java/jdk1.6.0 \n\ > > A patch for this is trivial, but the occurrences in the README files > are a bit trickier, for example: > > """ > After installing Fedora 9 > you need to install several build dependencies. The simplest > way to do it is to execute the following commands as user > root: >

> yum-builddep java-1.6.0-openjdk >

> yum install gcc gcc-c++ >

> """ > > That would be yum-builddep java-1.7.0-openjdk then. Now, in Fedora 15 > there's no java-1.7.0-openjdk, so I doubt that there is one in Fedora > 9 (which is long time unsupported). > > Wouldn't make sense to rewrite this part of the guide completely then > to reflect more recent distributions and guidelines? Yes, we need to advance the README to focus on the newer systems. > > In any case, in this moment with jdk7 soon to be the requirment for > jdk8, I think that the only way to build the jdk8 would be by first > building the jdk7 in most situation. I think that would be right. Maybe painful enough that people will go after systems with pre-built jdk7's on them? ;^) > > What do you think? Yup. I agree. -kto > > Cheers, > Mario > > -- > pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF > Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF > > Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ > Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org > OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ > > Please, support open standards: > http://endsoftpatents.org/ From neugens at limasoftware.net Wed Jul 27 22:24:02 2011 From: neugens at limasoftware.net (Mario Torre) Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 00:24:02 +0200 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: References: <4e0e453a.dc97d80a.15ce.ffffc76c@mx.google.com> <1310067123.4394.1.camel@galactica> <4E2CA046.2030801@gatworks.com> <6AB6C50C-810E-41B6-91BF-45368C08F279@oracle.com> <5C722A5A-1CB6-4719-9628-4D1B17EDDA4B@oracle.com> <589D37EA-2192-41F0-BB14-21115772DA00@oracle.com> <4E2F997C.7000509@oracle.com> <1311781667.2830.7.camel@galactica> Message-ID: 2011/7/27 Kelly O'Hair : >> That would be yum-builddep java-1.7.0-openjdk then. Now, in Fedora 15 >> there's no java-1.7.0-openjdk, so I doubt that there is one in Fedora >> 9 (which is long time unsupported). >> >> Wouldn't make sense to rewrite this part of the guide completely then >> to reflect more recent distributions and guidelines? > > Yes, we need to advance the README to focus on the newer systems. > >> >> In any case, in this moment with jdk7 soon to be the requirment for >> jdk8, I think that the only way to build the jdk8 would be by first >> building the jdk7 in most situation. > > I think that would be right. Maybe painful enough that people will go after > systems with pre-built jdk7's on them? ;^) Ah! But that will not scare Gentoo users away! :) >> >> What do you think? > > Yup. I agree. I'll write down some proposal for the README files and propose them here then. I will try to send you hopefully tomorrow a patch for the Makefile as well. Cheers, Mario -- pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA? FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ Please, support open standards: http://endsoftpatents.org/ From ahughes at redhat.com Wed Jul 27 23:34:08 2011 From: ahughes at redhat.com (Dr Andrew John Hughes) Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 00:34:08 +0100 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: References: <589D37EA-2192-41F0-BB14-21115772DA00@oracle.com> <4E2F997C.7000509@oracle.com> <1311781667.2830.7.camel@galactica> Message-ID: <20110727233407.GH22822@rivendell.middle-earth.co.uk> On 00:24 Thu 28 Jul , Mario Torre wrote: > 2011/7/27 Kelly O'Hair : > > >> That would be yum-builddep java-1.7.0-openjdk then. Now, in Fedora 15 > >> there's no java-1.7.0-openjdk, so I doubt that there is one in Fedora > >> 9 (which is long time unsupported). > >> > >> Wouldn't make sense to rewrite this part of the guide completely then > >> to reflect more recent distributions and guidelines? > > > > Yes, we need to advance the README to focus on the newer systems. > > > >> > >> In any case, in this moment with jdk7 soon to be the requirment for > >> jdk8, I think that the only way to build the jdk8 would be by first > >> building the jdk7 in most situation. > > > > I think that would be right. Maybe painful enough that people will go after > > systems with pre-built jdk7's on them? ;^) > I don't think they exist yet. > Ah! But that will not scare Gentoo users away! :) > Gentoo is actually the only distro I know of that's had an OpenJDK7 ebuild for years... # emerge -pv icedtea:7 These are the packages that would be merged, in order: Calculating dependencies... done! [ebuild R *] dev-java/icedtea-7.1.14 USE="debug doc examples pulseaudio systemtap webstart xrender -cacao -jamvm -javascript -nsplugin -zero" 0 kB [1] > >> > >> What do you think? > > > > Yup. I agree. > > I'll write down some proposal for the README files and propose them > here then. I will try to send you hopefully tomorrow a patch for the > Makefile as well. > > Cheers, > Mario > > -- > pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF > Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF > > Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ > Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org > OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ > > Please, support open standards: > http://endsoftpatents.org/ -- Andrew :) Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) Support Free Java! Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath http://icedtea.classpath.org PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 From neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com Thu Jul 28 15:50:31 2011 From: neugens.limasoftware at gmail.com (Mario Torre) Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 17:50:31 +0200 Subject: JDK 7: General Availability In-Reply-To: <20110728151031.347225A81@eggemoggin.niobe.net> References: <20110728151031.347225A81@eggemoggin.niobe.net> Message-ID: Congratulations! Mario 2011/7/28 : > The first and only JDK 7 Release Candidate passed all its tests with > flying colors. > > After 9,494 bug fixes, 1,966 enhancements, 9,018 changesets, 147 builds, > and four JSRs, JDK 7 is done. > > A giant thank-you to everyone who contributed to this release -- from > Sun, Oracle, and elsewhere -- and especially to those who held on for the > long haul of four years, seven months, and seventeen days since JDK 6. > > - Mark > -- pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA? FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF IcedRobot: www.icedrobot.org Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ Please, support open standards: http://endsoftpatents.org/ From dalibor.topic at oracle.com Thu Jul 28 19:56:42 2011 From: dalibor.topic at oracle.com (Dalibor Topic) Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 12:56:42 -0700 Subject: 7's up Message-ID: <4E31BEFA.2080205@oracle.com> Java 7 and JDK7 are finally here! Congrats, everyone! To those of you that have contributed and helped make this happen ? A heartfelt thanks! If you haven?t been involved already the fact that you are reading this message makes it likely that you are interested in helping in the future. As I'm about to board my flight taking me back back home to Hamburg, Germany from the OSCON Java conference in Portland, Oregon, I wanted to point you to this great, quick "JDK 7 in a Nutshell" OSCON Java keynote from Joe Darcy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7nkB3hxH5po And, if you haven?t had a chance to do so already, I can strongly recommend watching these recorded sessions from our 7/7 launch event covering the major JDK 7 features in a lot more detail: * Making Heads and Tails of Project Coin: Small Language Changes in JDK 7 - http://medianetwork.oracle.com/media/show/16805 * Divide and Conquer Parallelism with the Fork/Join Framework - http://medianetwork.oracle.com/media/show/16804 * The New File System API in JDK 7 - http://medianetwork.oracle.com/media/show/16803 * A Renaissance VM: One Platform, Many Languages - http://medianetwork.oracle.com/media/show/16802 * Meet the Experts: Q&A and Panel Discussion - http://medianetwork.oracle.com/media/show/16801 cheers, dalibor topic -- Oracle Dalibor Topic | Java F/OSS Ambassador Phone: +494023646738 | Mobile: +491772664192 Oracle Java Platform Group ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG | Nagelsweg 55 | 20097 Hamburg ORACLE Deutschland B.V. & Co. KG Hauptverwaltung: Riesstr. 25, D-80992 M?nchen Registergericht: Amtsgericht M?nchen, HRA 95603 Komplement?rin: ORACLE Deutschland Verwaltung B.V. Hertogswetering 163/167, 3543 AS Utrecht, Niederlande Handelsregister der Handelskammer Midden-Niederlande, Nr. 30143697 Gesch?ftsf?hrer: J?rgen Kunz, Marcel van de Molen, Alexander van der Ven Green Oracle Oracle is committed to developing practices and products that help protect the environment From ahughes at redhat.com Fri Jul 29 00:28:26 2011 From: ahughes at redhat.com (Dr Andrew John Hughes) Date: Fri, 29 Jul 2011 01:28:26 +0100 Subject: Allow HotSpot to build on Linux 3.0+ In-Reply-To: References: <20110728015738.GL22822@rivendell.middle-earth.co.uk> <1311858123.9467.12.camel@springer.wildebeest.org> <9F0F7FEF-E1FE-40AB-A8FA-0657EB4802EF@oracle.com> <20110728135408.GP22822@rivendell.middle-earth.co.uk> Message-ID: <20110729002826.GD22822@rivendell.middle-earth.co.uk> On 10:45 Thu 28 Jul , Keith McGuigan wrote: > > On Jul 28, 2011, at 9:54 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote: > > > On 09:17 Thu 28 Jul , Keith McGuigan wrote: > >> > >> Ok, thanks. Code looks good to me then. > >> > > > > Ok, can I push this or do you still need to do this via JPRT? > > > > Either way, I need a bug ID please. > > Yes, this will need to be pushed via JPRT (as all hotspot pushes > must). I can create an ID for this too. One more review would be > good too. > Ok. Going forward, non-Oracle OpenJDK contributors either need to be able to push via JPRT or some other method needs to be used which is accessible by all. > -- > - Keith -- Andrew :) Free Java Software Engineer Red Hat, Inc. (http://www.redhat.com) Support Free Java! Contribute to GNU Classpath and IcedTea http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath http://icedtea.classpath.org PGP Key: F5862A37 (https://keys.indymedia.org/) Fingerprint = EA30 D855 D50F 90CD F54D 0698 0713 C3ED F586 2A37 From keith.mcguigan at oracle.com Fri Jul 29 00:31:58 2011 From: keith.mcguigan at oracle.com (Keith McGuigan) Date: Thu, 28 Jul 2011 20:31:58 -0400 Subject: Allow HotSpot to build on Linux 3.0+ In-Reply-To: <20110729002826.GD22822@rivendell.middle-earth.co.uk> References: <20110728015738.GL22822@rivendell.middle-earth.co.uk> <1311858123.9467.12.camel@springer.wildebeest.org> <9F0F7FEF-E1FE-40AB-A8FA-0657EB4802EF@oracle.com> <20110728135408.GP22822@rivendell.middle-earth.co.uk> <20110729002826.GD22822@rivendell.middle-earth.co.uk> Message-ID: <12222025-C653-4BBD-8518-F3DDB9D7F528@oracle.com> On Jul 28, 2011, at 8:28 PM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote: > On 10:45 Thu 28 Jul , Keith McGuigan wrote: >> >> On Jul 28, 2011, at 9:54 AM, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote: >> >>> On 09:17 Thu 28 Jul , Keith McGuigan wrote: >>>> >>>> Ok, thanks. Code looks good to me then. >>>> >>> >>> Ok, can I push this or do you still need to do this via JPRT? >>> >>> Either way, I need a bug ID please. >> >> Yes, this will need to be pushed via JPRT (as all hotspot pushes >> must). I can create an ID for this too. One more review would be >> good too. >> > > Ok. Going forward, non-Oracle OpenJDK contributors either need to be > able to push via JPRT or some other method needs to be used which is > accessible by all. We have top men working on it now. Top men. (At least, I'm pretty sure we do...) -- - Keith From neugens at limasoftware.net Sun Jul 31 16:12:40 2011 From: neugens at limasoftware.net (Mario Torre) Date: Sun, 31 Jul 2011 18:12:40 +0200 Subject: Forest Extension - Not to be found? In-Reply-To: References: <4e0e453a.dc97d80a.15ce.ffffc76c@mx.google.com> <1310067123.4394.1.camel@galactica> <4E2CA046.2030801@gatworks.com> <6AB6C50C-810E-41B6-91BF-45368C08F279@oracle.com> <5C722A5A-1CB6-4719-9628-4D1B17EDDA4B@oracle.com> <589D37EA-2192-41F0-BB14-21115772DA00@oracle.com> <4E2F997C.7000509@oracle.com> <1311781667.2830.7.camel@galactica> Message-ID: 2011/7/28 Mario Torre : > I'll write down some proposal for the README files and propose them > here then. I will try to send you hopefully tomorrow a patch for the > Makefile as well. I'm trying to build the JDK8 with a local JDK7 as a dependency, on Fedora 15, but I'm stuck at the very beginning: make[2]: Entering directory `/home/neugens/work_space/netbeans/jdk8-build/langtools/make' JAVA_HOME=/home/neugens/work_space/netbeans/jdk7u/build/linux-amd64/j2sdk-image/ ANT_OPTS=-Djava.io.tmpdir='/home/neugens/work_space/netbeans/jdk8-build/build/linux-amd64/langtools/build/ant-tmp' ant -diagnostics > /home/neugens/work_space/netbeans/jdk8-build/build/linux-amd64/langtools/build/ant-diagnostics.log ; \ JAVA_HOME=/home/neugens/work_space/netbeans/jdk7u/build/linux-amd64/j2sdk-image/ ANT_OPTS=-Djava.io.tmpdir='/home/neugens/work_space/netbeans/jdk8-build/build/linux-amd64/langtools/build/ant-tmp' ant -version >> /home/neugens/work_space/netbeans/jdk8-build/build/linux-amd64/langtools/build/ant-diagnostics.log Error: Could not find or load main class org.apache.tools.ant.launch.Launcher Error: Could not find or load main class org.apache.tools.ant.launch.Launcher make[2]: *** [/home/neugens/work_space/netbeans/jdk8-build/build/linux-amd64/langtools/build/ant-diagnostics.log] Error 1 make[2]: Leaving directory `/home/neugens/work_space/netbeans/jdk8-build/langtools/make' make[1]: *** [langtools-build] Error 2 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/neugens/work_space/netbeans/jdk8-build' make: *** [build_product_image] Error 2 Doing some debug it seems that the ant script launches at some point a script called "build-classpath", which tries to build the classpath and set it as an environment variable, but fails for some reason. I can bypass this script but then the ant itself fails because it doesn't find the correct jars. Now, I think this maybe a Fedora 15 bug, although those scripts do not seem to be completely tied to Fedora (that means this can be a bug affecting other distribution using the jpackage system that seems to be behind this build-classpath script). It maybe that building the JDK using a boot JDK other than ALT_BOOTDIR=/usr/lib/jvm/java-openjdk doesn't work, at least of F15 (which is not exactly the best Linux distribution around to be honest). Does anybody here (Andrew, Mark?) have experienced similar issues? I'm sure there is an easy way to set all this configuration stuff, but probably we need to tweak the makefiles to support that. Cheers, Mario -- pgp key: http://subkeys.pgp.net/ PGP Key ID: 80F240CF Fingerprint: BA39 9666 94EC 8B73 27FA? FC7C 4086 63E3 80F2 40CF Proud GNU Classpath developer: http://www.classpath.org/ Read About us at: http://planet.classpath.org OpenJDK: http://openjdk.java.net/projects/caciocavallo/ Please, support open standards: http://endsoftpatents.org/