Improving OpenJDK for FreeBSD

[Magnus Ihse Bursie]

On 2025-03-06 19:38, Harald Eilertsen wrote:

> On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 05:32:50PM +0100, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
>> On 2025-02-21 04:03, David Holmes wrote:
>>> I would not like to see it happen that way. If it is to happen then I
>>> would prefer to see a project established and a project repo.
>> [...snip...]
>>
>> I think that could work as well, but I guess the difficult part will be to
>> get reviewers from the relevant areas.
> I'm happy to go whichever way the OpenJDK community thinks is the best
> approach. On advantage I see from our perspective with the separate
> project repo is that it may be easier to do a bit of experimentation and
> testing different approaches before a merge into the mainline.
>
> It will still be possible to do a phased approach to merging the changes
> into the mainline, so that should give any reviewers that didn't come
> around for the first merges into the project repo a second chance to
> voice their concerns.

Formally, there is already a bsd-port project ("Port: BSD Project" is 
the formal name), and according to the Census, Greg Lewis is the Project 
Lead. That means he has the authority to request that a repo be setup 
for this project. I hope you have enough contact with him to ask him to 
send an email to ops at openjdk.org to request such a repo. Since the cogs 
of the OpenJDK administration moves slowly, I'd suggest trying get him 
to send such a request already; then the repo might be created in time 
for it to be actually needed.

Formally, I believe it would be good if he also nominates you as member 
of the bsd-port project. In time, especially if your position at FreeBSD 
is turning out to be long-term, I think it would be good (and likely 
supported by Lewis) to have you moving into the Project Lead position of 
the BSD port project.

There is also an old mailing list associated with the project; we might 
consider moving this discussion over there. (Otoh, the porters-dev list 
is basically empty so I don't think we're overwhelming everyone by 
keeping the discussion here as well.)


>
>> Also, I don't know if this has been said before, but this work requires a
>> JEP.
> No, I haven't heard anything about that (I think). I'll read up on it,
> and get back if I need a hand to hold on to :)

Have a look at e.g. JEP 388 (https://openjdk.org/jeps/388) which 
introduced the Windows/aarch64 port. That was really about combining an 
existing OS and an existing CPU, but I'd say the amount of changes 
required is similar to the BSD port, so I guess aiming at a JEP of 
similar complexity level is fine.

/Magnus


>
> Take care!
> Harald