timsort (original) (raw)

Martin Buchholz martinrb at google.com
Tue Jun 30 19:10:58 UTC 2009


On Tue, Jun 30, 2009 at 11:32, Andrew Haley <aph at redhat.com> wrote:

Martin Buchholz 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? Ouch, that touched a nerve. I certainly hope not. Goodness knows, we're really trying to make that separate set of patches go away.

I wasn't trying to criticize IcedTea specifically. Both IcedTea and Google are working hard to send changes upstream, but I know that Google has some that will remain private, and I suspect that may be true for all 3 of our organizations going forward, despite our best efforts to achieve a common code base.

Martin

Andrew. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/core-libs-dev/attachments/20090630/ead74974/attachment.html>



More information about the core-libs-dev mailing list