Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR: 8257733: Move module-specific data from make to respective module

2020-12-07 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 14:20:07 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> @erikj79 Good point, that makes much more sense. > > I'm not sure about the formal process for suggesting changes to a delivered > JEP, but this is the text I suggest should replace the current definition of > the new scheme: > >

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR: 8257733: Move module-specific data from make to respective module

2020-12-07 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
On Fri, 4 Dec 2020 15:17:06 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> Regarding the chosen layout. Did you consider following the existing pattern >> of src//{share,}/data? > > @erikj79 Good point, that makes much more sense. I'm not sure about the formal process for suggesting changes to a delivered

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR: 8257733: Move module-specific data from make to respective module [v2]

2020-12-07 Thread Magnus Ihse Bursie
> A lot (but not all) of the data in make/data is tied to a specific module. > For instance, the publicsuffixlist is used by java.base, and fontconfig by > java.desktop. (A few directories, like mainmanifest, is *actually* used by > make for the whole build.) > > These data files should move t

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR: 8257733: Move module-specific data from make to respective module [v2]

2020-12-07 Thread Jonathan Gibbons
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 14:27:45 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> A lot (but not all) of the data in make/data is tied to a specific module. >> For instance, the publicsuffixlist is used by java.base, and fontconfig by >> java.desktop. (A few directories, like mainmanifest, is *actually* used by >

Re: [OpenJDK 2D-Dev] RFR: 8257733: Move module-specific data from make to respective module [v2]

2020-12-07 Thread Mandy Chung
On Mon, 7 Dec 2020 19:31:59 GMT, Jonathan Gibbons wrote: >> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one >> additional commit since the last revision: >> >> Move to share/data, and move jdwp.spec to java.se > > I have reviewed all lines in the patch file with or near