PLEASE READ: OpenJFX developer repos + JDK 10 RDP1 deadlines

[Kevin Rushforth]

Yes, this is the deadline for JDK 10 changes, both to core JDK (e.g., 
2D) and FX.

You can submit the openjfx 10 patch if you like, but I will wait until 
the 2D webrev is done being reviewed before acting on it. I note that it 
is a very large patch...

-- Kevin


Laurent Bourgès wrote:
> Kevin,
>
> To be sure, does it mean OpenJFX 10 changes are due to dec 14th ie for 
> JDK10 RDP1 ?
>
> I would like to provide MarlinFX 0.8.2 for jfx10 but the remaining 
> time is short for the web review to happen... and the RFR Marlin 0.8.2 
> patch for Java2d is submitted but no comment yet. 
>
> Should I submit an openjfx 10 patch for monday ? 
>
> Cheers,
> Laurent
>
> Le 28 nov. 2017 22:44, "Kevin Rushforth" <kevin.rushforth at oracle.com 
> <mailto:kevin.rushforth at oracle.com>> a écrit :
>
>     To: All OpenJFX developers
>
>     There are two related items that you need to be aware of, so
>     please read this if you are a developer of OpenJFX.
>
>     Executive summary:
>
>     1. To match the JDK project, which has a persistent,
>     non-release-specific mainline repo [1], the FX 10 and 10-dev repos
>     will be "renamed" to jfx and jfx-dev. Starting Monday, Dec 4 all
>     fixes for FX should be pushed to jfx-dev/rt rather than 10-dev/rt.
>
>     2. As a reminder, the JDK 10 RDP1 milestone is coming up on Dec 14
>     [2]. All bug fixes and RFEs planned for 10 should be pushed by
>     that date. We will fork the repo at that time and only approved
>     fixes will go into JDK 10 after that point.
>
>
>     Details:
>
>     1. Historically, the JDK has had separate development mainline
>     repos for each code line, and the OpenJFX project has followed
>     this pattern. Starting with JDK 10, development has switched to a
>     model where the development branch is persistent (that is, it
>     doesn't change when a new release is started) and is no longer
>     release-specific. So there is a jdk project with a jdk mainline
>     repo [1], and no longer a jdk10 mainline repo. We will start
>     following this for the OpenJFX project, too.
>
>     We will "effectively rename" the FX 10-dev (and 10 [master]) repos
>     to jfx-dev (and jfx [master]). I use the term "effectively
>     rename", because what we will actually do is clone a new jfx-dev
>     repo from 10-dev and make 10-dev read-only. This is because we
>     will shortly need a new forked repo for 10 stabilization, so it is
>     easier to do this than delete and recreate it.
>
>     The end result will be that for developers, the place you push
>     fixes going forward will always be "jfx-dev/rt" rather than
>     "10-dev/rt" and then "11-dev/rt" and then ...
>
>     The planned timeline for the switchover is:
>
>     Sunday, Dec 3
>
>     * The openjfx 10-dev forest will be made read only at 8:00 pm
>     Pacific time on Sunday. If you have a fix that you want in before
>     Monday, then you need to push it no later than 7:59 pm (Pacific)
>     Sunday night.
>
>     * The jfx-dev forest will be cloned from 10-dev (and the jfx
>     [master] forest will be cloned from 10 [master])
>
>     Monday, Dec 4
>
>     * Once this is done and tested, I will send out email announcing
>     that it is open for pushing. I expect that this will happen early
>     Monday morning (Pacific time). Once the repo is open, developers
>     will need to edit their .hgrc files to point to the new jfx-dev
>     forest instead of 10-dev.
>
>
>     2. As a reminder, the JDK 10 RDP1 milestone is coming up on Dec 14
>     [2]. All bug fixes and RFEs planned for 10 should be pushed by
>     that date. We will fork the repo at that time; only approved fixes
>     will go into JDK 10 after that point. The guidelines are that only
>     P1-P3 bugs will be considered for inclusion into JDK 10 during
>     RDP1, and not all P3 bugs will be taken.  Generally developers
>     focus on getting a fix into the mainline, and it will make the
>     next available train. Once the 10 stabilization repo has forked,
>     the next train will be 11.
>
>     I expect that more guidance will be given on the jdk-dev mailing
>     list as for the processes and policies surrounding this.
>
>     -- Kevin
>
>     [1] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/
>     <http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk/jdk/>
>
>     [2] http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk/10/
>     <http://openjdk.java.net/projects/jdk/10/>
>