On Mar 11, 2011, at 4:46 AM, Johan Walles wrote: > 2011-03-11 01:57, Dr Andrew John Hughes skrev: >> On 06:40 Fri 11 Mar , David Holmes wrote: >>> Fredrik Öhrström said the following on 03/10/11 20:22: >>>> I think it is important that a recent stock mercurial install >>>> can check out the full openjdk with a single clone >>>> command. >>>> >>>> I.e. you should not have to install special extensions just >>>> to get the source code. >>> >>> That's a bit of a leading/loaded question ;-) >>> >>>> There are several ways this can be solved. But before >>>> we dive into discussions on the possible alternatives, >>>> I would like to see who else think it is a good idea. >>> >>> Stepping up a level, an initial download of openjdk need not involve >>> using mercurial at all. You can simply download a stable snapshot as a >>> tar file; >> >> This makes much more sense as a starting point for new users over having >> to handle Mercurial and checkouts. It works fine if you just want to _use_ >> the latest and greatest, not hack on it. > > Hi! > > I don't really follow you when you say that people would "want to _use_ > the latest and greatest [source code], not hack on it". > > What would people do with the source code if not hack on it?
Historically, there have been quite a few 'just download and [try to] build' use scenarios, I'd say the great majority, maybe 80% or more. I don't think this is unusual, how many people download and build open source projects and never contribute anything to them? -kto > > If they *do* want to hack on it, I know I'd want to have it under version > control. > > Regards /Johan > >>> or download an install script that will do whatever is >>> necessary behind the scenes to get a complete openjdk. >> >> I don't know how that would work. I guess IcedTea comes close to this idea >> in that it detects the needed settings for the build, rather than them all >> having to be passed as make variables. >> >>> Personally I'd >>> like to see that include the basic build tools as well - in which case I >>> don't care about "special extensions" as I just get a working toolkit. >> >> What do you mean by this? Can you give an example? >> >>> I >>> think in the scheme of things the process of getting the source code for >>> the openjdk is the easiest part of the process. Depending on your >>> platform setting up mercurial so that you could do that "single clone >>> command" may be a far greater problem. And setting up the build >>> environment an order of magnitude greater again. >>> >>>> Clearly, comments from people outside of Oracle >>>> are the most important! >>> >>> Clearly. :) >>> >> >> Well as a person outside Oracle, I'd agree that getting a checkout is the >> least of my problems. Configuring builds and fixing bugs is a much greater >> problem than having to write a few extra 'hg clone' commands to get a full >> checkout. It's just a matter of using a for loop or cobbling together a >> shell script as Kelly has done. Trivial stuff for anyone planning to >> build or hack on OpenJDK. >> >>> Cheers, >>> David >>> >>>> (When the source is checked out, then there can be >>>> mercurial extensions in the checked out source code >>>> for example jcheck that assists in sanity tests before >>>> committing. So this does not limit the actual extensions >>>> used later. Only that we should not "improve" on the versioning >>>> part of mercurial.) >>>> >> >> jcheck is server-side. It needs to be released as Free Software not >> so we can all run it but so we can see what the heck it's doing and >> fix issues with it. >> >>>> //Fredrik >>> >>