RFR: 8257731: Remove excessive include of stubRoutines.hpp

[Ioi Lam]

On 12/6/20 3:23 AM, Claes Redestad wrote:
>
>
> On 2020-12-06 11:15, David Holmes wrote:
>>>
>>> And since there's likely going to be some churn happening in tandem 
>>> in both mainline and stabilization fork in the coming weeks, 
>>> wouldn't it be better to get changes like these pushed _before_ 
>>> rather than right after the JDK 16 stabilization fork is created? 
>>> The second best option might be to hold off with large 
>>> cleanups/reshuffling until RDP2 starts.
>>
>> I think the point was to defer to this to be 17 only so no churn at 
>> all in 16 RDP1 or RDP2.
>
> Seems we're talking past each other:
>
> - The churn I'm referring to is the regular weeks (or months) of bug 
> fixing and forward-porting that happen after a stabilization fork - not
> some highly unlikely churnpocalypse resulting from this patch in 
> particular.
>
> - Getting this into 17 right after the stabilization fork means we have
> an increased risk of merge conflicts etc, which means the automatic
> forward porting of pushes to 16 will be in peril.
>
> So what I'm suggesting here is to either:
>
> - Get this tested out on all platforms and pushed _now_ to reduce risk
> of conflicts during 16 stabilization
>
> OR
>
> - Wait until some time after 16 forks to get past the 16 stabilization
> churn to minimize risk of conflicts during stabilization that might
> prohibit automatic forward porting.
>

Notwithstanding my claim that this commit is not a disruptive one ....

Do we have a policy of withholding disruptive changes in the mainline 
during the RDP timeline?

Thanks
- Ioi

> I have a preference for the former.
>
> /Claes
>
>
>
>