Workshop Discussion Proposals from Adoption Group / LJC

[Martijn Verburg]

Hi All,

I have and update to the OpenJDK 8u and 11u maintenance topic below.
Apologies for not using the proper Workshop topic: or Workshop proposal:
titles to split all of these suggestions out.  I won't be able to
personally attend so please treat the list below as Workshop topic: items.

AdoptOpenJDK Build Farm:
> ------------------------------------
>
> 1. We would like to discuss some small changes to source control
> practices at OpenJDK to make life easier for builders of OpenJDK. In
> particular we'd like to get agreement on specific release tags so OpenJDK
> builders can match Oracle's OpenJDK quarterly and CPU releases.
>
> 2. The AdoptOpenJDK build farm infrastructure as code includes build
> scripts, installers, container support, test scripts / suites and JCK
> utilities (for those who are JCK signatories). How can we make this easier
> either technically or process wise for folks so that all vendors / parties
> can benefit from this shared resource? An ideal outcome here is that all
> vendors can save time and effort on build and test of OpenJDK (no one
> competes on build / farms) and end users have openly audited, consistent
> OpenJDK binaries.
>
> 3. The AdoptOpenJDK build farm hosts are intended for use by all vendors
> / interested parties (within reason).  How can we make this easier either
> technically or process wise for folks? Some benefits include being able to
> better support Java's WORA promise across more ports (AIX, Zos, Arm 32/64,
> Win32, z390 et al) and to disseminate and test early binaries of builds
> coming out of amber, valhalla etc.
>
> 4. The AdoptOpenJDK build farm team would like to discuss OpenJDK (LTS)
> patch maintenance (once public updates by Oracle cease for an LTS release).
> An ideal outcome would be to have clear identification of security and
> stability patches so that other OpenJDK vendors can back port for their own
> implementations.
>
> Adoption Group:
> -----------------------
>
> 1. The Adoption Group has been going for awhile and has had some success,
> but not the impact it would have liked.  We'd like to discuss the
> outstanding barriers that developers wanting to contribute to OpenJDK face
> today so that we can improve the number and velocity of newcomers to
> OpenJDK.
> 2. We'd like to discuss the current state of Java 9+ adoption in
> production and what changes OpenJDK may need to make in order to improve
> that in order to reduce the length of time that the industry stays on Java
> 8.
>
> OpenJDK Roadmap:
> ---------------------------
>
> 1. We'd like to discuss the OpenJDK strategic roadmap, for example is
> Cloud / Container support the top priority for the next 6 releases?  It
> would be interesting to discuss how that Roadmap could be visualised with
> JEP's fulfilling the various goals.
>
> 2. We'd like to discuss the OpenJDK roadmap specifically around:
>         * Value Types and related work
>         * Safer replacements for functionality in sun.misc.Unsafe
> * GPU support / Support for ML specific hardware
> * Java Packager
> * FFI
> * Improvements to Jigsaw
>
> These topics in particular are 'future' items that various LJC developers
> have stated are of most interest to their businesses.
>
> 3. We'd like to discuss OpenJDK jdk8u maintenance once public updates by
> Oracle cease. An ideal outcome would be to find maintainer(s) going
> forwards.
>

4. We'd like to discuss OpenJDK jdk11u maintenance once public updates by
Oracle cease. An ideal outcome would be to find maintainer(s) going
forwards.

I think it would be interesting to explore a shared / collaborative
approach to maintaining 8u and 11u as opposed to placing the burden on a
particular vendor. If Oracle prefer to have a single vendor lead the
maintenance of 8u and 11u we could still explore working in a unified
manner behind that official maintainer.

Assuming new maintainers will lead 8u updates after 2019 and 11u updates
(after 6 months post GA release) then a question for me is how we can work
with Oracle to identify patches that a 8u and/or 11u maintainer should back
port (in particular security and stability patches). I suspect we all share
a concern around the possibility of a proliferation of OpenJDK LTS releases
by individual vendors, none of which are alike.

One technical challenge is putting patches through a shared build and test
pipeline to support the full range of architectures and variants out there
today. That hurdle can be mitigated by using the Adopt build farm.  Ideally
all source code work would occur in OpenJDK update projects and Adopt would
just build and test the results of that.

Cheers,
> Martijn
>
>
> On Tue, 10 Jul 2018 at 14:22, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On 07/10/2018 10:45 AM, Martijn Verburg wrote:
>> > Was wondering if there was any feedback on these proposals (and the
>> others
>> > on this list).
>>
>> Dunno.  The formatting is so awful that it's unreadable.
>>
>> --
>> Andrew Haley
>> Java Platform Lead Engineer
>> Red Hat UK Ltd. <https://www.redhat.com>
>> EAC8 43EB D3EF DB98 CC77 2FAD A5CD 6035 332F A671
>>
>