On 2013-06-19 03:10, Stuart Marks wrote:
--
I have half a mind to look at the Configure changes myself in my spare
time (ha!), but I have no spare time, and I don't have the expertise
in this area anyway. So anyone is welcome to pick this up. In
principle it should be fairly simple, and I think it's fairly
important. This isn't the first time someone's been bitten by having
the wrong boot JDK version, and it won't be the last.
Currently, configure checks that the found boot jdk is 7 or 8. Do we
really want to actively prevent using 8 all together? I could agree to
printing a big warning in the summary at the end of configure to
discourage it, but I do believe it necessary to have the ability to
build with 8 for tracking down certain bugs.
Regarding the rearrangement of corba/jaxp/jaxws to use the fresh JDK
instead of the boot JDK. At least we know they build, because the boot
cycle build builds them successfully. (At least, I think it does.)
Now, I don't think the artifacts produced from a boot cycle build are
actually tested or are delivered anywhere in a bundle. So, while it
seems quite unlikely, some bugs could have been introduced by building
with a newer JDK version.
Now ... circular dependencies ... urk ... I *knew* there was something
that would make this complicated. Well, maybe these will need to be
refactored away somehow. Or maybe some kind of GenStubs technique can
be used to deal with the circularity.
You introduced yet another point as well, which is the relationship
between the repository organization and the build structure. As I
understand things, each repository has its own build support and
builds in a separate step from the others. In principle I think that
the repository structure ought to be orthogonal to the build
structure. At least, if we move to a more modular build structure,
that shouldn't imply that we need to have each module in its own
repository. In fact I'd like to see fewer repositories. To me, the
only compelling reason to have a separate repo is if the source code
in it is a snapshot of an upstream source base -- as seems to be the
case for jaxws. Having all the stuff in fewer repos makes it easier to
bisect to find failures, and it reduces the need for careful
management of coordinated, cross-repo changes.
My preferred solution would be to fold in the repos that aren't upstream
projects into jdk and just have them compile with the rest there. I much
like the idea of reducing the number of repos. If that isn't possible,
we can just add those source directories to the main javac invocation in
jdk too.
/Erik
