On 2025-03-07 15:16, Thomas Stüfe wrote:

@Magnus Ihse Bursie <mailto:magnus.ihse.bur...@oracle.com>

Why would we need a JEP? That is a lot of unnecessary red tape. The BSD port already exists. It is technically not a new port.

If we are to include it in the mainline, which is the goal here, a JEP is needed. We have only ever added or removed supported platforms in mainline with a JEP.

/Magnus


On Thu, Mar 6, 2025 at 8:19 PM Magnus Ihse Bursie <magnus.ihse.bur...@oracle.com> wrote:

    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

Reply via email to