Geir, I like the overall letter. Anton,
I have related question. How can we improve http://harmonytest.org to make it possible to publish not just pass, fail, or error but numeric test scores? How this is related to the letter? I believe that stress tests which were mentioned in the letter may have scores in a way performance tests do, see http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/subcomponents/stresstest/index.html BTW, Egor Pasko requested scores to report documentation quality. With best regards, Alexei Fedotov, Intel Java & XML Engineering >-----Original Message----- >From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 4:51 AM >To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org >Subject: Re: [DRLVM] General stability > > > >Fedotov, Alexei A wrote: >> Alexey Petrenko wrote, >>> The only release I can imagine is Harmony Java5SE 100% compatible. >>> To be Java5SE 100% compatible we need TCK first. >> >> +1 >> > >Yes - and I still think that talk of a release is a bit premature right >now. > >The key things that I believe we need to focus on are > > a) stability and > > b) completeness. > > c) reliability (which may be 'stability') > >(and not always in that order :) > > >Things I'd like to see us do : > >1) We need to drive to fully working unit tests for both DRLVM and >classlib (using DRLVM). Great progress has been made in this area, and > we should probably make this a "campaign" for DRLVM as we did for >classlib. > >2) Add stress tests > >3) Get our CC-based build-test framework patched and running on as many >platforms as possible, reporting breakage into the list. > >4) Identify problem areas and focus on them. For example, threading in >DRLVM... > >I do think of us having a 'zero regression' policy except in cases where >we make the explicit decision to break. (like we did with TM, for example) > > >> I hesitate to say that again, but we also need to decide about VM we >> will use for that release. I like the following mission: "Class library >> and DRLVM pass TCK on Ubuntu 6". I'm open for any other mission which is >> challenging, understandable and short enough. > >Well, we'll need Windows XP and RHEL as well. > > >> >> Writing down this mission certainly shouldn't inhibit individuals from >> achieving other goals at Harmony. But it would help the rest of >> community to concentrate on the common task. >> >> 1. >> http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_Harmony_Development_Kit_ >> on >> >> With best regards, >> Alexei Fedotov, >> Intel Java & XML Engineering >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Alexey Petrenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 10:36 AM >>> To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org >>> Subject: Re: [DRLVM] General stability >>> >>> 2006/11/8, Mikhail Fursov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>>> On 11/8/06, Alexey Petrenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>>>> Probably it's time to create some release plan :) >>>>> >>>> So let's start this discussion? >>>> Good idea! >>>> The only release I can imagine is Harmony Java5SE 100% compatible. >>> To be Java5SE 100% compatible we need TCK first. >>> So we could think about some less impressive goal for the first release >> :) >>> SY, Alexey >>
