(original) (raw)
On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 09:24, Andrew John Hughes <gnu_andrew@member.fsf.org> wrote:
Right.� There is a problem when different sets of contributors have different
objectives for things like
compatibility, portability, stability, benchmark performance....
It might be that a significant contributor (like Sun or IcedTea) would maintain
a separate set of patches essentially forever, since they would not be
acceptable to the greater community.� Oh, I guess that's already happened, eh?
There's also the issue of the size of the project.� Is OpenJDK a "project",
or is it an aggregator of projects maintained by various third parties,
like a Linux distro?� Given how the code base has grown, at least a large
number of components should be treated in the latter way.
It is already the case, I believe, that the JAX\* code is essentially imported
unchanged from upstream maintainers.
Martin
�
2009/6/30 Martin Buchholz <martinrb@google.com>:OpenJDK is (or at least should now be) a community-driven open source
> (There is the deeper governance issue of who gets to make
> such decisions.� I would like most of such decisions to be made
> by the "group" of engineers who do the work.� For collections/concurrency,
> such a group has worked informally for many years.)
>
project. �And so, the community as a whole should be making such
decisions, not just those who happen to be employed by Sun.
Right.� There is a problem when different sets of contributors have different
objectives for things like
compatibility, portability, stability, benchmark performance....
It might be that a significant contributor (like Sun or IcedTea) would maintain
a separate set of patches essentially forever, since they would not be
acceptable to the greater community.� Oh, I guess that's already happened, eh?
There's also the issue of the size of the project.� Is OpenJDK a "project",
or is it an aggregator of projects maintained by various third parties,
like a Linux distro?� Given how the code base has grown, at least a large
number of components should be treated in the latter way.
It is already the case, I believe, that the JAX\* code is essentially imported
unchanged from upstream maintainers.
Martin
�