
OpenJDK is now on GitHub - carimura
https://mail.openjdk.java.net/pipermail/jdk-dev/2020-September/004694.html
======
pron
[https://github.com/openjdk/jdk](https://github.com/openjdk/jdk)

~~~
ocdtrekkie
It's really weird a choice in the email to provide links that looked like they
weren't on GitHub to redirect to the GitHub URLs... For a moment, I was
wondering if they had like a self-hosted GitHub Enterprise setup or something,
until I noticed the URL redirected anyways.

~~~
pron
That's intentional. Links will contain the redirecting address on our domain
so that when we move off of GH (some day; nothing lasts forever), links will
continue to work.

~~~
s3cur3
This strategy has saved our bacon at work more than a handful of times. All
the URLs we ship in our apps point to a "lookup" server (just Nginx with a
huge list of redirect rules), such that if the URL we were using in the app
disappears, we can change it on the server side rather than requiring a client
update.

------
geogra4
Is anyone else worried about the mass centralization of Open Source projects
at one central point of failure on github?

especially since it's owned by an American company and I assume hosted within
the United States

~~~
andrewla
Not me. The fact that it's in git makes it easy to mirror and export, so I
don't consider github to be a central point of failure. Issue tracking and PR
handling lives in the github UI, but the significant change here is a change
from Mercurial to Git, which I hold as a positive development.

Fundamentally git is a data storage format that is very well-defined, with a
standard command-line interface which is fine, not great. Mercurial has an
arguably better command-line interface, but a data structure that is not well-
defined or documented, and the main interface to hg is through python-based
plugins, which is just awful.

~~~
ashtonkem
You even see GitHub mirrors for got projects hosted privately, which is good.

If github went away, tons of projects would need to rework their workflow, but
very few people would actually lose their code, which is the most expensive
asset to restore.

------
Hello71
Unfortunately, similar to a number of other Enterprise Open Source projects,
despite being on GitHub, potential contributors still cannot open any tracked
bugs, and need to _print and scan_ a CLA before submitting any code.

------
tw04
I apologize as it's _slightly_ off-topic, but for anyone that is stuck working
on old gear that still uses a java interface/JNLP and doesn't want to run JAVA
6 - here's an open source project that's keeping JNLPs alive and as secure as
they can:

[https://openwebstart.com/](https://openwebstart.com/)

[https://github.com/karakun/OpenWebStart](https://github.com/karakun/OpenWebStart)

Been a life saver for me (and I am in no way affiliated).

When I switched to OpenJDK I was dead in the water for JNLPs until I found it.

~~~
chrisseaton
> JAVA 6

Why do you capitalise it like this? It's not an abbreviation.

~~~
thangalin
Nor an acronym.

------
gravitas
Title clarification: OpenJDK specifically, there are many name-branded JDKs in
circulation.

~~~
Alupis
Most of which take the OpenJDK source, sprinkle in some "secret sauce" and
then compile the entire thing for convenience of users.

It's not a trivial undertaking to compile OpenJDK from sources.

There are not very many JDK implementations that don't have OpenJDK sources at
their core.

OpenJDK is also treated as the reference implementation, and is where JEP's
and things are worked out. Effectively, OpenJDK is "upstream" Java.

~~~
Hello71
> It's not a trivial undertaking to compile OpenJDK from sources.

uh? assuming you already have a working C toolchain and JDK installed, you
just hg^Wgit clone; bash configure; make.

edit: you may have more trouble compiling it on windows, but compiling
_anything_ on windows is a pain unless it uses the entire proprietary non-
portable microsoft-specific project management tools.

~~~
swiley
RE: compiling on windows

Apple is honestly giving Microsoft a run for their money here. Many FOSS apps
seem to have given up on OSX and few ever tried with iOS.

~~~
TheDong
IMO it's harder to compile for macOS than for windows.

I don't have a macbook. I can legally run a trial copy of windows in
virtualbox to test out cross-compiling stuff, or spin up a windows EC2
instance for a few hours, or even use circleci or other CI system's windows
workers to build stuff.

For macOS, I can't legally run a VM on my hardware, ec2 doesn't support it so
I can't spin up a VM, and most CI platforms don't support it (probably because
many of them just resell fleets of ec2 instances).

Many FOSS developers are just hacking away on 3 year old laptops or desktops
for fun, and can't afford a $2k investment just to support one more operating
system for their little project.

