What should the relationship between ports and developers of large projects be?

[Jesper Wilhelmsson]

> On 27 May 2022, at 18:28, Andrew Haley <aph-open at littlepinkcloud.com> wrote:
> 
> On 5/27/22 15:05, Andrew Haley wrote:
> 
>> So, it's going to be something of a rush. I hope that JDK 19 won't be
>> blighted by broken or absent ports because of this. This would be a
>> great shame.
> 
> I see that Alan Bateman just posted in https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/8919
> that there will hopefully soon be an alternative implementation of virtual
> threads backed by platform threads, that allows ports to pass conformance
> tests, although the result clearly won't scale like real virtual threads do.
> 
> The rest of my message about communicating with porters still stands, I think.

A good start would be a list of contacts for each port. Is there any such list and is it kept up to date?
Or would it be enough for a project lead of a soon to be integrated project to send an email to the porters-dev list and assume that all active ports are represented there?

/Jesper

> 
> -- 
> Andrew Haley  (he/him)
> Java Platform Lead Engineer
> Red Hat UK Ltd. <https://www.redhat.com>
> https://keybase.io/andrewhaley
> EAC8 43EB D3EF DB98 CC77 2FAD A5CD 6035 332F A671