Mercurial forests for JDK 8

[Phil Race]

On 5/24/2011 2:28 PM, Mike Duigou wrote:
> It would be nice to see the number of repos reduced even further. awt/swing/2d merged? perhaps this could even include deploy as "client". Also perhaps a build/l10n merge?

For specific forests, that is a question for those groups, not for 
members of other groups.
We've considered this in the past and prefer them separate. Also build 
is unrelated to l10n.

I also think there's a tenuous connection between merging these and 
getting fixes into
master at a faster rate.

-phil.

> The rate at which changes currently propagate to the master and then back to the sub-respos is too slow. There is admittedly a tension between the risks of premature integration and those of delayed bug surfacing. The current repo policies seem to entirely favour the later which isn't necessarily the best answer. The more time that passes between a bug being introduced and it being recognized and fixed, the greater the cost in fixing it. I believe that faster dissemination of changesets will help to reveal introduced bugs more quickly and bring down the time and cost for fixing them. Combining repos seems a part of achieving this.
>
> Mike
>
> On May 24 2011, at 13:53 , mark.reinhold at oracle.com wrote:
>
>> I'm in the process of creating the master forest, which will be rooted at
>> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk8/jdk8.
>>
>> What other group/integration forests do we want to have?
>>
>> JDK 7 has 21 (!) separate forests.  Only these have been updated in 2011:
>>
>>     2d
>>     awt
>>     build
>>     deploy
>>     hotspot
>>     hotspot-comp
>>     hotspot-gc
>>     hotspot-rt
>>     l10n
>>     swing
>>     tl
>>
>> The VM team would prefer to host their group and integration forests
>> under the HSX Project since they deliver into multiple JDK release
>> trains, so unless there are other suggestions I'll just create these:
>>
>>     2d
>>     awt
>>     build
>>     deploy
>>     l10n
>>     swing
>>     tl
>>
>> Comments?
>>
>> - Mark