Ray Gans | 3 Jan 09:32 2008
Picon

Feedback request: OpenJDK Community Innovator's Challenge Grants


As you may have heard, Sun has announced the Community Innovation Awards Program (see http://www.sun.com/software/opensource/awards/) for several open source communities that we sponsor. The goal of this program is to foster and recognize innovation in these communities by offering grants/prizes to new efforts that will have an strong impact.

The OpenJDK program will be called the OpenJDK Community Innovator's Challenge Grants (OCICG). We want to encourage developers to collaborate and creatively solve key problems facing the OpenJDK Community, initiate new projects that innovate on the OpenJDK code base, leverage the code for new uses, develop curricula and training, and port the code to new platforms, all to further the objectives of the OpenJDK Community in developing and disseminating compatible, free software implementations of the Java SE platform. We'd also like your help to make this program effective, valuable and fun for non-Sun participants. 

To implement this program, Sun will award several large grants to a few projects that can be completed by August 2008. Help us determine how to best select project proposals for consideration and allocate the money (we have approximately $175,000 to distribute). 

Here is how we're thinking it should work (though this may change based on your feedback):

- On January 14, 2008 Sun will kick off the OCICG program and announce the criteria that will be used to select a set number of projects. OpenJDK participants will be encouraged to submit proposals for a project they want to work on. Proposals could be made by groups of individuals, existing F/OSS teams, companies/organizations, Java User Groups, etc. 
- Proposals will be accepted until March 3, 2008. At this time the proposals will be judged by a team of people (we're thinking 2 from Sun and 3 from outside Sun). We're also thinking of accepting only seven or less proposals.
- Accepted proposals will be announced on March 17 ,2008 with all project work to be completed by August 4, 2008.
- Awards will be delivered to completed projects on August 18, 2008 with cash amounts determined by the judges. We're thinking that the most valuable projects should be awarded a larger prize than others – though all completed projects will be given a cash award. Note that no money will be available until August and all awards must be distributed at that time. Obviously, judges and Sun personnel will be ineligible for any cash awards.

Scope and Constraints
- The program will begin in January 2008 and end in August 2008.
- Since this program is technically an international contest, there are strict rules by which it must be run. For example, participation will be restricted to countries that allow these kinds of contests. We would like to make the program open to as many countries as possible, however, since every country has different laws and requirements, we cannot accommodate everyone. We won't have the exact country list until mid-January. Other rules may also apply that limit what can and can't be done as part of this program.
- Projects can only have limited dependence on Sun involvement/participation. This is for fairness across all projects. Likewise, projects cannot require a commitment by Sun for significant time/effort for success since we cannot guarantee adequate Sun resources will be available -- for example, a project to build a better bug database for OpenJDK, while very useful, would require heavy involvement by Sun personnel to integrate it with Sun's internal bug management systems.
- All project code (if any) must be contributed to Sun under the Sun Contributor Agreement (see http://www.sun.com/software/opensource/sca.pdf).

We are interested in what the OpenJDK community thinks about the OCICG. You can help by providing input on any of the following questions (and whatever else you'd like to comment on). 
- What kind of projects do you think would be valuable to the OpenJDK community?
- What selection criteria should be used to choose the best proposals?
- How many proposals should be accepted?
- Do you think the OpenJDK community at  large should have any input into the proposal selection process?
- Who you think would make good objective judges for the program and why?
- What thoughts do you have about how the proposal selection process should be handled?
- Do you think the OpenJDK community at large should have any input into selecting projects that really excel (and be awarded larger prizes)?
- What criteria should be used to determine the payout for cash awards?
- How should abandoned or non-completed projects be handled and what should constitute a "completed" project?
- How should awards be handled for project team members who drop out or are added after a proposal is accepted?


Thanks,

The OpenJDK team at Sun

Andrew John Hughes | 3 Jan 10:23 2008
Picon

Re: Feedback request: OpenJDK Community Innovator's Challenge Grants



On 03/01/2008, Ray Gans <Ray.Gans <at> sun.com > wrote:

As you may have heard, Sun has announced the Community Innovation Awards Program (see http://www.sun.com/software/opensource/awards/) for several open source communities that we sponsor. The goal of this program is to foster and recognize innovation in these communities by offering grants/prizes to new efforts that will have an strong impact.

The OpenJDK program will be called the OpenJDK Community Innovator's Challenge Grants (OCICG). We want to encourage developers to collaborate and creatively solve key problems facing the OpenJDK Community, initiate new projects that innovate on the OpenJDK code base, leverage the code for new uses, develop curricula and training, and port the code to new platforms, all to further the objectives of the OpenJDK Community in developing and disseminating compatible, free software implementations of the Java SE platform. We'd also like your help to make this program effective, valuable and fun for non-Sun participants. 

To implement this program, Sun will award several large grants to a few projects that can be completed by August 2008. Help us determine how to best select project proposals for consideration and allocate the money (we have approximately $175,000 to distribute). 

Here is how we're thinking it should work (though this may change based on your feedback):

- On January 14, 2008 Sun will kick off the OCICG program and announce the criteria that will be used to select a set number of projects. OpenJDK participants will be encouraged to submit proposals for a project they want to work on. Proposals could be made by groups of individuals, existing F/OSS teams, companies/organizations, Java User Groups, etc. 
- Proposals will be accepted until March 3, 2008. At this time the proposals will be judged by a team of people (we're thinking 2 from Sun and 3 from outside Sun). We're also thinking of accepting only seven or less proposals.
- Accepted proposals will be announced on March 17 ,2008 with all project work to be completed by August 4, 2008.
- Awards will be delivered to completed projects on August 18, 2008 with cash amounts determined by the judges. We're thinking that the most valuable projects should be awarded a larger prize than others – though all completed projects will be given a cash award. Note that no money will be available until August and all awards must be distributed at that time. Obviously, judges and Sun personnel will be ineligible for any cash awards.

Scope and Constraints
- The program will begin in January 2008 and end in August 2008.
- Since this program is technically an international contest, there are strict rules by which it must be run. For example, participation will be restricted to countries that allow these kinds of contests. We would like to make the program open to as many countries as possible, however, since every country has different laws and requirements, we cannot accommodate everyone. We won't have the exact country list until mid-January. Other rules may also apply that limit what can and can't be done as part of this program.
- Projects can only have limited dependence on Sun involvement/participation. This is for fairness across all projects. Likewise, projects cannot require a commitment by Sun for significant time/effort for success since we cannot guarantee adequate Sun resources will be available -- for example, a project to build a better bug database for OpenJDK, while very useful, would require heavy involvement by Sun personnel to integrate it with Sun's internal bug management systems.
- All project code (if any) must be contributed to Sun under the Sun Contributor Agreement (see http://www.sun.com/software/opensource/sca.pdf ).

We are interested in what the OpenJDK community thinks about the OCICG. You can help by providing input on any of the following questions (and whatever else you'd like to comment on). 
-  What kind of projects do you think would be valuable to the OpenJDK community?
- What selection criteria should be used to choose the best proposals?
- How many proposals should be accepted?
- Do you think the OpenJDK community at  large should have any input into the proposal selection process?
- Who you think would make good objective judges for the program and why?
- What thoughts do you have about how the proposal selection process should be handled?
- Do you think the OpenJDK community at large should have any input into selecting projects that really excel (and be awarded larger prizes)?
- What criteria should be used to determine the payout for cash awards?
- How should abandoned or non-completed projects be handled and what should constitute a "completed" project?
- How should awards be handled for project team members who drop out or are added after a proposal is accepted?

Please send your thoughts to discuss <at> openjdk.java.net.

Thanks,

The OpenJDK team at Sun



My initial thought is that OpenJDK will suffer from still being a fairly nascent project.  Without being disparaging to all the great work done by Sun in releasing the OpenJDK source code (which must have been and still is a huge task), there isn't yet much of an OpenJDK community, other than that which it has adopted from existing projects such as GNU Classpath.  Is there really the infrastructure in place to have a timed project take place?

That said, I'd love to see it happen and think it would be a great way of fostering such a community if it could be made to happen.  As regards projects, I think you have to just give fairly general criteria and see what gets proposed.  Only then can you really decide on appropriateness and the exact criteria to use.  Again, I think the problem will be that, at least my impression so far, is that there are no really active unfunded projects taking place which really interact with the core OpenJDK code base and bring Sun and external developers together.  There is of course a porting effort and the framebuffer toolkit project which are both external, so there may be some interest there.  The other projects listed on the OpenJDK site are very much internal Sun projects still; I'm on many of the mailing lists (too many really for most people) and I don't see a lot of traffic on most of them.  Certainly nothing like patches, etc. but that's because the public repositories have only just become available.  I don't want to sound negative, but when you compare OpenJDK with OpenSolaris, which is also taking part, there's a lot more activity already in existence which will make things a lot easier for them.

One solution I think is to give each successful project it's own tree or forest (depending on the scale of the project), just like each team does now.  Encourage activity there and interaction between the participants.  This is certainly important as you seem to be proposing this to groups rather than individuals, which I think is a plus. Allow frequent commits there (with the appropriate SCA in place of course) and then handle the task of whether or not to feed the result back to the main project in August.  When it comes to evaluating success, any successful project needs to have clear defined goals for judging this as part of the proposal.  Having the code in a public repository means that both incomplete and complete projects will be accessible afterwards, even if the participants lose interest and disappear.  The community can then decide how to handle the resulting work most effectively.

As to payouts, it really depends on who you are trying to attract.  With Google's Summer of Code, they aim this at individual students where the money is the primary incentive and so the reward is predefined and given in chunks, some of which is awarded before the project even begins (a project that fails midway, for example, still gets the student $2500 out of $4500).  My perception of Sun's awards is more of one of bounties for groups of participants, where I think the award can be justifiably set on evaluation of the project and its merit, and then used as a bounty to be awarded only on its successful completion.  The scheme would also be helped a lot if the OpenJDK community came up with some suggested projects with appropriate bounties to encourage contributions.  It should still be made clear that new proposals are welcome, but this makes it easier for people to get involved who only have a vague idea about what the OpenJDK needs.

I hope that's of some help,
--
Andrew :-)

Help end the Java Trap!
Contribute to GNU Classpath and the OpenJDK
http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath
http://openjdk.java.net
Andy Tripp | 3 Jan 20:38 2008

Re: Feedback request: OpenJDK Community Innovator's Challenge Grants

Hi Ray,
Here are my thoughts...

Ray Gans wrote:

Proposals could be made by groups of individuals, existing F/OSS teams, companies/organizations, Java User Groups, etc.
Presumably also individuals, right?
- Proposals will be accepted until March 3, 2008. At this time the proposals will be judged by a team of people (we're thinking 2 from Sun and 3 from outside Sun).
Make this "group of 5" be an OpenJDK group, with all (or most) discussions on an open mailing list.

Note that no money will be available until August and all awards must be distributed at that time.
It might be worthwhile to have at least one fairly formal milestone for each project, so the project developers can be sure they're "on the right track".

- Projects can only have limited dependence on Sun involvement/participation. This is for fairness across all projects. Likewise, projects cannot require a commitment by Sun for significant time/effort for success since we cannot guarantee adequate Sun resources will be available -- for example, a project to build a better bug database for OpenJDK, while very useful, would require heavy involvement by Sun personnel to integrate it with Sun's internal bug management systems.

Each proposal should be required to spell out exactly what it requires from Sun. Using your bug database project example, it might require a snapshot of the current Sun bug database as simple comma-separated values. One snapshot at the start of the project and then another snapshot in August to cut over to the new database.


- What kind of projects do you think would be valuable to the OpenJDK community?
A "How to Hack the OpenJDK" book.
A better bug database (obviously, you've already thought of that :) ).
Massive improvements to the build system (Kelly O'Hair on steriods).
A remote build system that lets a developer make changes locally and submit changes to a server and get back executables for his platform, without him having to know anything about how the build works.
A version of Android based on OpenJDK.
- What selection criteria should be used to choose the best proposals?
The group should just have some general criteria statement like "Projects that advance the goals of the OpenJDK project" and then reference a link that spells out the goals of OpenJDK. Unfortunately, the only such like I can find is this: http://www.sun.com/software/opensource/java/faq.jsp#e
So maybe spell out the goals yourselves: "increased adoption and increased innovation"
- How many proposals should be accepted?
Seven or less sounds good.
- Do you think the OpenJDK community at  large should have any input into the proposal selection process?
Other than to allow anyone to participate in a mailing list discussion, no.
- Who you think would make good objective judges for the program and why?
Inside Sun, someone like you and a Mark Reinhold/Danny Coward type of person. Outside Sun, you just want to be sure to pick people who want to advance OpenJDK itself, as opposed to pushing some social agenda or some OpenJDK alternative.
- What thoughts do you have about how the proposal selection process should be handled?
After the proposal submission period ends, publish the proposals, allow a couple weeks of discussion on a mailing list,
and then the "group of 5" votes. If greater than 7 submissions, each person may only vote for 7 proposals and
the 7 proposals with the most votes win. If 7 or less, A yes/no vote on each. To break down the money awards,
after discussion, any of the 5 can submit a proposal for how to split the awards.
The first such proposal to get 3 yes votes wins.
- Do you think the OpenJDK community at large should have any input into selecting projects that really excel (and be awarded larger prizes)?
Again, hold the discussions on open mailing lists and allow anyone to comment.
- What criteria should be used to determine the payout for cash awards?
Use some vague wording such as "Award amount will be based on potential value to the OpenJDK community".
And I would keep it to being based on value, not difficulty. No need for a "degree of difficulty" modifier.
- How should abandoned or non-completed projects be handled and what should constitute a "completed" project?
I presume accepted project participants will have to sign something simple that says they will do their best to complete
the project by a certain date. It should also mention that if they can't complete the project, they must post a notice
on the mailing list.
- How should awards be handled for project team members who drop out or are added after a proposal is accepted?
Ugh. That's a tough one. I guess that this thing that accepted projects would have to sign should designate a single
entity (person or corp) that will receive the money, and that Sun will award the money to that entity. Who gets
added or deleted or whatever from the project team is then none of Sun's business. You sure don't want to
try to micromanage that.

So, this "You've been accepted" document might contain:
* notice that you've been accepted
* expectation that you'll finish by $DATE, that it will be reasonable quality, and it will be substantially what's in the proposal.
* promise that Sun will pay the amount of $AMOUNT on date $DATE to $ENTITY upon successful completion
* description of any milestones
* mention that ultimately, "successful completion" will be determined by this "group of 5".
* mention that Sun stays out of issues about who is on the project
* mention any help that Sun agrees to (e.g. one bug database dump at start, another at end)
* any other required legal mumbo jumbo

Please send your thoughts to discuss <at> openjdk.java.net.

Thanks,

The OpenJDK team at Sun
Good Luck with it!
Andy

Tom Marble | 3 Jan 23:44 2008
Picon

Re: Source tarballs

Andreas Sterbenz wrote:
> Xiomara Jayasena wrote:
>>
>> We really didn't see the need, hence we decided to get rid of them. 
>> It seems anyone working in JDK 7 may need to become familiar with hg
>> -- that said I appreciate your input.  Here at Sun we will no longer
>> be using the tarred source and expect engineers to do clones and that
>> is the same expectation for developers outside of Sun.   If many
>> people think this is crucial then the decision can be re-evaluated.
> 
> It is still possible to get source tarballs - by going to
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/ . Just click on the zip/gz/bz2 link next to
> the desired repository to get the tip (e.g.
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7/archive/tip.tar.bz2) or navigate to
> the changeset or tag you like and follow the download link (e.g.
> http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7/rev/0a5c5386a678).
> 
> The only thing it doesn't do is understand forests, so you have to
> download the source for each of the seven repositories in the forest
> separately (/if/ you really want them all).

I'd like to ask if we (Sun) can reconsider publishing one (1)
source tarball for promoted builds.

This question has come up in the past in the context of many
Free Software distro build daemons which proscribe live Internet
access during binary builds.  Usually there is a "source package"
which is uploaded to the build daemon which specifies any build
time dependencies (e.g. specific compilers, header file packages)
and includes the upstream tarball(s).

This question came up again, today, on IRC in the context of
building OpenJDK for stable distros.  Developers stated that it
is very desirable for non-root users to be able to build OpenJDK
on stable distros by making only one simple request to their
system administrator for a list of build dependency packages.
While the user may have Internet access she cannot specify
packages which were not part of the stable release.

Without an OpenJDK upstream tarball this means that the typical
way of getting the OpenJDK source is with "hg fclone" [0].
Which means that one would need Mercurial [1] with the Forest Extension [2]
(and Mercurial needs python 2.4).  This is complicated by the
fact that the Forest Extension (currently, unversioned) is only
supported on Mercurial  0.9.3, 0.9.4, and 0.9.5.

If we take such a stable distribution, Debian etch [3] for example, then
we find the following:
  python
    2.4.4 http://packages.debian.org/etch/python/python
    2.5   http://packages.debian.org/etch/python/python2.5
  hg
    0.9.1 http://packages.debian.org/etch/mercurial
    0.9.5 http://packages.debian.org/etch-backports/mercurial  BACKPORT
  forest
    (no version number) requires Mercurial 0.9.3, 0.9.4, or 0.9.5.

This looks promising, except I learned that the "backports"
repository is not considered part of the primary distribution and
thus could not be used as a build dependency.  The other problem is
that getting forest.py configured for the system "hg" (i.e. not
requiring every user to fix their ~/.hgrc) would require a new
package (i.e. mercurial-forest) which is also not possible because
such a package did not exist (and still does not) at the time
the stable distribution was frozen.

In distributions where hg 0.9.5 is available then there is solution
(albeit less desirable) to have the user add forest.py to ~/bin
and the path to ~/.hgrc (or equivalent in the build directory).

Another possible solution, along the lines of what Andreas suggested,
would be to grab the 7 tarballs from upstream and then combine them.
If I understand this correctly, however, it would require scripting
(or publishing) for each promoted build tag a set of changesets
for each subordinate repository (e.g. b24 [4]).

Compared to this complexity of these solutions if we simply published
one tarball then supporting hg 0.9.5 and the forest extension would
not be a build requirement.

Please let me know what you think (esp. if I have characterized
the solutions accurately).

Regards,

--Tom

[0] http://weblogs.java.net/blog/kellyohair/archive/2007/12/openjdk_mercuri_7.html
[1] http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/
[2] http://www.selenic.com/mercurial/wiki/index.cgi/ForestExtension
[3] http://www.debian.org/releases/etch/
[4] http://hg.openjdk.java.net/jdk7/jdk7/log/cfeea66a3fa8

Neo Jia | 3 Jan 23:53 2008
Picon

Re: Feedback request: OpenJDK Community Innovator's Challenge Grants

On Jan 3, 2008 11:38 AM, Andy Tripp <openjdk@...> wrote:
>
>  Hi Ray,
>  Here are my thoughts...
>
>  Ray Gans wrote:
>
>
> Proposals could be made by groups of individuals, existing F/OSS teams,
> companies/organizations, Java User Groups, etc.
>  Presumably also individuals, right?
>
>
> - Proposals will be accepted until March 3, 2008. At this time the proposals
> will be judged by a team of people (we're thinking 2 from Sun and 3 from
> outside Sun). Make this "group of 5" be an OpenJDK group, with all (or most)
> discussions on an open mailing list.
>
>
>
> Note that no money will be available until August and all awards must be
> distributed at that time.
>  It might be worthwhile to have at least one fairly formal milestone for
> each project, so the project developers can be sure they're "on the right
> track".
>
>
>
> - Projects can only have limited dependence on Sun
> involvement/participation. This is for fairness across all projects.
> Likewise, projects cannot require a commitment by Sun for significant
> time/effort for success since we cannot guarantee adequate Sun resources
> will be available -- for example, a project to build a better bug database
> for OpenJDK, while very useful, would require heavy involvement by Sun
> personnel to integrate it with Sun's internal bug management systems.
>
>  Each proposal should be required to spell out exactly what it requires from
> Sun. Using your bug database project example, it might require a snapshot of
> the current Sun bug database as simple comma-separated values. One snapshot
> at the start of the project and then another snapshot in August to cut over
> to the new database.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> - What kind of projects do you think would be valuable to the OpenJDK

I can provide something I have when I hack the jdk especially GC part,
which might help somebody to start their jdk projects.

Where should I put them? It is on my personal wiki now.

Thanks,
Neo

> community? A "How to Hack the OpenJDK" book.
>  A better bug database (obviously, you've already thought of that :) ).
>  Massive improvements to the build system (Kelly O'Hair on steriods).
>  A remote build system that lets a developer make changes locally and submit
> changes to a server and get back executables for his platform, without him
> having to know anything about how the build works.
>  A version of Android based on OpenJDK.
>
>
> - What selection criteria should be used to choose the best proposals? The
> group should just have some general criteria statement like "Projects that
> advance the goals of the OpenJDK project" and then reference a link that
> spells out the goals of OpenJDK. Unfortunately, the only such like I can
> find is this: http://www.sun.com/software/opensource/java/faq.jsp#e
>  So maybe spell out the goals yourselves: "increased adoption and increased
> innovation"
>
>
> - How many proposals should be accepted? Seven or less sounds good.
>
>
> - Do you think the OpenJDK community at  large should have any input into
> the proposal selection process? Other than to allow anyone to participate in
> a mailing list discussion, no.
>
>
> - Who you think would make good objective judges for the program and why?
> Inside Sun, someone like you and a Mark Reinhold/Danny Coward type of
> person. Outside Sun, you just want to be sure to pick people who want to
> advance OpenJDK itself, as opposed to pushing some social agenda or some
> OpenJDK alternative.
>
>
> - What thoughts do you have about how the proposal selection process should
> be handled? After the proposal submission period ends, publish the
> proposals, allow a couple weeks of discussion on a mailing list,
>  and then the "group of 5" votes. If greater than 7 submissions, each person
> may only vote for 7 proposals and
>  the 7 proposals with the most votes win. If 7 or less, A yes/no vote on
> each. To break down the money awards,
>  after discussion, any of the 5 can submit a proposal for how to split the
> awards.
>  The first such proposal to get 3 yes votes wins.
>
>
> - Do you think the OpenJDK community at large should have any input into
> selecting projects that really excel (and be awarded larger prizes)? Again,
> hold the discussions on open mailing lists and allow anyone to comment.
>
>
> - What criteria should be used to determine the payout for cash awards? Use
> some vague wording such as "Award amount will be based on potential value to
> the OpenJDK community".
>  And I would keep it to being based on value, not difficulty. No need for a
> "degree of difficulty" modifier.
>
>
> - How should abandoned or non-completed projects be handled and what should
> constitute a "completed" project? I presume accepted project participants
> will have to sign something simple that says they will do their best to
> complete
>  the project by a certain date. It should also mention that if they can't
> complete the project, they must post a notice
>  on the mailing list.
>
>
> - How should awards be handled for project team members who drop out or are
> added after a proposal is accepted? Ugh. That's a tough one. I guess that
> this thing that accepted projects would have to sign should designate a
> single
>  entity (person or corp) that will receive the money, and that Sun will
> award the money to that entity. Who gets
>  added or deleted or whatever from the project team is then none of Sun's
> business. You sure don't want to
>  try to micromanage that.
>
>  So, this "You've been accepted" document might contain:
>  * notice that you've been accepted
>  * expectation that you'll finish by $DATE, that it will be reasonable
> quality, and it will be substantially what's in the proposal.
>  * promise that Sun will pay the amount of $AMOUNT on date $DATE to $ENTITY
> upon successful completion
>  * description of any milestones
>  * mention that ultimately, "successful completion" will be determined by
> this "group of 5".
>  * mention that Sun stays out of issues about who is on the project
>  * mention any help that Sun agrees to (e.g. one bug database dump at start,
> another at end)
>  * any other required legal mumbo jumbo
>
>
>
>
> Please send your thoughts to discuss@...
>
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> The OpenJDK team at Sun Good Luck with it!
>  Andy
>
>

--

-- 
I would remember that if researchers were not ambitious
probably today we haven't the technology we are using!

Xiomara Jayasena | 4 Jan 00:49 2008
Picon

Re: Source tarballs


Hi Tom,

Happy New Year!

Tom Marble wrote:
I'd like to ask if we (Sun) can reconsider publishing one (1) source tarball for promoted builds.

Yes it is definitely being considered -- as it makes sense, especially if it is difficult for people to pull down the 7 tar balls that currently exist now. There are a couple of ways to go about this so that will need to be sorted out. 

Best regards,
-Xiomara


Max (Weijun) Wang | 4 Jan 00:53 2008
Picon

Re: Source tarballs

Is it easy to hack the hg HTTP server to let it understand forest?

Max

On Jan 4, 2008, at 7:49 AM, Xiomara Jayasena wrote:

>
> Hi Tom,
>
> Happy New Year!
>
> Tom Marble wrote:
>> I'd like to ask if we (Sun) can reconsider publishing one (1)  
>> source tarball for promoted builds.
>
> Yes it is definitely being considered -- as it makes sense,  
> especially if it is difficult for people to pull down the 7 tar  
> balls that currently exist now. There are a couple of ways to go  
> about this so that will need to be sorted out.
>
> Best regards,
> -Xiomara
>
>

Landon Fuller | 4 Jan 01:14 2008
Picon

Re: Feedback request: OpenJDK Community Innovator's Challenge Grants


On Jan 3, 2008, at 00:32, Ray Gans wrote:

- What kind of projects do you think would be valuable to the OpenJDK community?

I'd love to see more community development on porting work -- including Mac OS X and BSD support (perhaps this is obvious, coming from me).

Speaking just for Mac OS, it still needs work on multiple fronts (via the OpenJDK Porting Group and FreeBSD Java Project):
- Merging into OpenJDK (part of the larger BSD porting work).
- Support for hotspot x86_32 16-byte stack alignment (vs. using -fstack-realign work-around)
- x86_64 16-byte stack alignment fixes
- Integration of PowerPC support? (gbenson's?)
- Native AWT implementation

I'm not sure if this is something both Sun and the larger community are interested in =)

-landonf

David Herron | 4 Jan 04:18 2008
Picon

Re: Project Proposal: Haiku port of OpenJDK

Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!
Yes!

Dalibor Topic wrote:
> I hereby propose, on behalf of the Haiku OpenJDK port developers,
> the creation of a new project to create and maintain a port of OpenJDK
> to the Haiku operating system.
>
> For existing discussion of the proposal, I'd like to refer you to the 
> thread
> initiated by Bryan Varner's post proposing the project on the porters-dev
> mailing list at [1].
>
> cheers,
> dalibor topic
>
>
> [1] 
> http://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/porters-dev/2007-December/000035.html 
>

Tom Marble | 4 Jan 06:09 2008
Picon

Re: Project Proposal: Haiku port of OpenJDK

Dalibor Topic wrote:
> I hereby propose, on behalf of the Haiku OpenJDK port developers,
> the creation of a new project to create and maintain a port of OpenJDK
> to the Haiku operating system.
I approve.

I believe that encouraging broad adoption of OpenJDK on as many
Operating Systems and Architectures as possible is essential to
furthering our goals of Java ubiquity.

I regret, Bryan (et al), that it has taken so long to get to this point.
It has been a long time since that meeting back in June at the IndyJUG
where you first mentioned this to Ian Murdock.  I'm glad to support this project.
Thanks for your patience and for your contributions to OpenJDK.

And thank you, Dalibor, for all of your help in getting Porters going!

Regards,

--Tom


Gmane