Exactly. It might be a nice way around the binary plugs for those who don't care about that stuff.
Ted Neward Java, .NET, XML Services Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing http://www.tedneward.com > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, September 26, 2007 12:21 PM > To: Ted Neward > Cc: 'Christian Thalinger'; [email protected]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subject: Re: Makefile patch needed when building the b20 OpenJDK source > drop > > Good question... I'll explore that possibility, warn that no plugs are > available but build as much as possible kind of thing, right? > > -kto > > Ted Neward wrote: > > No promises heard, no expectations understood. :-) > > > > I personally have a hard time following the argument that says that > "because > > we put them into our source repository, we're asserting some kind of > legal > > license ownership" or something, but hey, I'm not a lawyer, either. > :-/ > > > > Here's a Really Dumb Question(TM): Is it possible (and then, is it > > practical) to create a build that doesn't use any of the binary plugs > stuff? > > A stripped-down, JVM-and-core-classes-only kind of build that just > uses the > > core stuff that's out in the Sun-blessed open source domain? (I > haven't > > found that I cared about any of the binary plugs-related stuff yet, > so...) > > > > Ted Neward > > Java, .NET, XML Services > > Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing > > http://www.tedneward.com > > > > > >> -----Original Message----- > >> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2007 8:12 PM > >> To: Ted Neward > >> Cc: 'Christian Thalinger'; [email protected]; > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> Subject: Re: Makefile patch needed when building the b20 OpenJDK > source > >> drop > >> > >> I would love for these binary plugs to go away, and second best, > make > >> them trivially available, but we are in legal territory here. > >> I will bring up this issue and see if we can't do what you suggest, > >> but I am not a lawyer, no promises. > >> > >> They are a royal pain, no argument there. > >> > >> -kto > >> > >> Ted Neward wrote: > >>> If they're going to change with every build release, then it's even > >> MORE > >>> important to make sure they're in some kind of source repository. > >> Otherwise, > >>> the whole point of keeping it in a source-code control repository > >>> (rollbacks, check out to a label, and so on) goes completely out > the > >> window > >>> when I can't get the corresponding binary plugs. > >>> > >>> I can't be the only one who grew up under the rule of source > control > >> that > >>> states, "Everything necessary to create a build must be stored in > the > >> source > >>> repository", can I? > >>> > >>> Ted Neward > >>> Java, .NET, XML Services > >>> Consulting, Teaching, Speaking, Writing > >>> http://www.tedneward.com > >>> > >>> > >>>> -----Original Message----- > >>>> From: Christian Thalinger [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >>>> Sent: Monday, September 24, 2007 2:03 AM > >>>> To: Ted Neward > >>>> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [email protected] > >>>> Subject: RE: Makefile patch needed when building the b20 OpenJDK > >> source > >>>> drop > >>>> > >>>> On Sun, 2007-09-23 at 23:40 -0700, Ted Neward wrote: > >>>>> If they can't rest in the same repository, then perhaps a > different > >>>>> repository? > >>>>> > >>>>> I'm just looking to be able to do a "svn up" (or its Mercurial > >>>> equivalent) > >>>>> and know that I've got everything I need to build the OpenJDK; > it's > >> a > >>>> lot > >>>>> more tedious to "svn up" then fetch the latest binary plugs > >>>> (particularly > >>>>> since I'm betting they're not going to change as frequently as > the > >>>> source > >>>>> does), and only then do a build. > >>>> That's wrong. Every source build has it's matching binary plug. > >> See: > >>>> http://download.java.net/openjdk/jdk7/ > >>>> > >>>> - twisti > >>>> > >>>> No virus found in this incoming message. > >>>> Checked by AVG Free Edition. > >>>> Version: 7.5.487 / Virus Database: 269.13.27/1020 - Release Date: > >>>> 9/20/2007 12:07 PM > >>>> > >>> No virus found in this outgoing message. > >>> Checked by AVG Free Edition. > >>> Version: 7.5.487 / Virus Database: 269.13.27/1020 - Release Date: > >> 9/20/2007 > >>> 12:07 PM > >>> > >>> > >> No virus found in this incoming message. > >> Checked by AVG Free Edition. > >> Version: 7.5.487 / Virus Database: 269.13.27/1020 - Release Date: > >> 9/20/2007 12:07 PM > >> > > > > No virus found in this outgoing message. > > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > > Version: 7.5.487 / Virus Database: 269.13.27/1020 - Release Date: > 9/20/2007 > > 12:07 PM > > > > > > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.487 / Virus Database: 269.13.27/1020 - Release Date: > 9/20/2007 12:07 PM > No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.487 / Virus Database: 269.13.27/1020 - Release Date: 9/20/2007 12:07 PM
