On 06/28/2018 08:21 AM, Volker Simonis wrote: > On Thu, Jun 28, 2018 at 12:08 AM, <mark.reinh...@oracle.com> wrote: >> Bug: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/JDK-8205956 >> Webrev: http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mr/rev/8205956/ >> >> Quick links to handier HTML diffs: >> >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mr/rev/8205956/doc/building.html.hdiff.html >> http://cr.openjdk.java.net/~mr/rev/8205956/doc/testing.html.hdiff.html >> >> “OpenJDK” is a trademarked term, per the OpenJDK Trademark Notice [1]. >> As such it should be used only as an adjective, and not as a noun. >> Phrases such as “the OpenJDK” could be replaced by the more correct, >> and much more verbose, “the OpenJDK JDK,” or “the open-source JDK,” >> but in most cases the context is sufficiently clear that we can just >> write “the JDK.” >> > > Sorry, but I don't see any sense in this change!
+1 Also, "(open-source) JDK" is way too generic, and does awkwardly apply to other JDK's in the wild, including IBM's, Azul's, Excelsior's, etc. It stands to reason that build/test instruction for OpenJDK project use "OpenJDK" to describe what those instructions apply to. It seems less confusing to find the appropriate noun to go with "OpenJDK", e.g. "OpenJDK build", "OpenJDK binary", "OpenJDK workspace", etc? -Aleksey
