On 2025-03-06 19:38, Harald Eilertsen wrote:
On Thu, Mar 06, 2025 at 05:32:50PM +0100, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote:
On 2025-02-21 04:03, David Holmes wrote:
I would not like to see it happen that way. If it is to happen then I
would prefer to see a project established and a project repo.
[...snip...]
I think that could work as well, but I guess the difficult part will be to
get reviewers from the relevant areas.
I'm happy to go whichever way the OpenJDK community thinks is the best
approach. On advantage I see from our perspective with the separate
project repo is that it may be easier to do a bit of experimentation and
testing different approaches before a merge into the mainline.
It will still be possible to do a phased approach to merging the changes
into the mainline, so that should give any reviewers that didn't come
around for the first merges into the project repo a second chance to
voice their concerns.
Formally, there is already a bsd-port project ("Port: BSD Project" is
the formal name), and according to the Census, Greg Lewis is the Project
Lead. That means he has the authority to request that a repo be setup
for this project. I hope you have enough contact with him to ask him to
send an email to o...@openjdk.org to request such a repo. Since the cogs
of the OpenJDK administration moves slowly, I'd suggest trying get him
to send such a request already; then the repo might be created in time
for it to be actually needed.
Formally, I believe it would be good if he also nominates you as member
of the bsd-port project. In time, especially if your position at FreeBSD
is turning out to be long-term, I think it would be good (and likely
supported by Lewis) to have you moving into the Project Lead position of
the BSD port project.
There is also an old mailing list associated with the project; we might
consider moving this discussion over there. (Otoh, the porters-dev list
is basically empty so I don't think we're overwhelming everyone by
keeping the discussion here as well.)
Also, I don't know if this has been said before, but this work requires a
JEP.
No, I haven't heard anything about that (I think). I'll read up on it,
and get back if I need a hand to hold on to :)
Have a look at e.g. JEP 388 (https://openjdk.org/jeps/388) which
introduced the Windows/aarch64 port. That was really about combining an
existing OS and an existing CPU, but I'd say the amount of changes
required is similar to the BSD port, so I guess aiming at a JEP of
similar complexity level is fine.
/Magnus
Take care!
Harald
