pure_wl_toolkit branch at OpenJDK

[Maxim Kartashev]

> Unless there is a strong need for a rebase, I recommend doing a merge
from jdk:master rather than a rebase.

That's understandable in general, but in this particular case we would like
to
- rebase on top of OpenJDK 21, not master,
- rewrite older commits as those turned out to be too rough for
publication, which somewhat nullifies the benefits of merge vs rebase.

Neither of those things is absolutely necessary. We can also have another
branch for active development and leave pure_wl_toolkit for periodic
synchronization, which, judging from experience, will significantly lag.

On Mon, Mar 20, 2023 at 4:54 PM Kevin Rushforth <kevin.rushforth at oracle.com>
wrote:

> Unless there is a strong need for a rebase, I recommend doing a merge
> from jdk:master rather than a rebase.
>
> -- Kevin
>
>
> On 3/20/2023 1:18 AM, Maxim Kartashev wrote:
> > To whom it may concern:
> > In a week or so we would like to rebase the Wakefield project
> > development branch (pure_wl_toolkit, [1]) on top of OpenJDK 21 and
> > clean up Wakefield-related commits history. That will be a breaking
> > change in the sense that you won't be able to simply fast-forward your
> > changes on top of pure_wl_toolkit after that and will have to do a
> > manual merge.
> >
> > If this action somehow affects your work, please reply to this email
> > so we can work out a solution.
> >
> > Thank you,
> >
> > Maxim.
> >
> > [1] https://github.com/openjdk/wakefield/tree/pure_wl_toolkit
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mail.openjdk.org/pipermail/wakefield-dev/attachments/20230320/bbbb9677/attachment.htm>