We have to evolving systems - classlib and DRLVM. To check commits to
classlib we need a stable DRLVM which can pass 100% of HUT. Otherwise it's
impossible to use DRLVM for pre-commit testing - you never know whether your
test fail because of your patch or due to latest changes in DRLVM.
I
Good work everyone!
While we may tend to be enticed by the API completeness numbers, it is
qualities such as compatibility, stability, and performance that we will
ultimately be measured upon and thanked for. It's encouraging to see
the team taking all these things so seriously.
Regards,
Tim
Pavel Ozhdikhin wrote:
We have to evolving systems - classlib and DRLVM. To check commits to
classlib we need a stable DRLVM which can pass 100% of HUT. Otherwise it's
impossible to use DRLVM for pre-commit testing - you never know whether
your
test fail because of your patch or due to latest
2006/11/16, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Pavel Ozhdikhin wrote:
We have to evolving systems - classlib and DRLVM. To check commits to
classlib we need a stable DRLVM which can pass 100% of HUT. Otherwise it's
impossible to use DRLVM for pre-commit testing - you never know whether
your
, November 16, 2006 12:37 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [drlvm][unit] 100% of class library tests pass
Pavel Ozhdikhin wrote:
We have to evolving systems - classlib and DRLVM. To check commits to
classlib we need a stable DRLVM which can pass 100% of HUT. Otherwise
it's
: [drlvm][unit] 100% of class library tests pass
Pavel Ozhdikhin wrote:
We have to evolving systems - classlib and DRLVM. To check commits to
classlib we need a stable DRLVM which can pass 100% of HUT. Otherwise
it's
impossible to use DRLVM for pre-commit testing - you never know
whether
your
test
-Original Message-
From: Tim Ellison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 12:37 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [drlvm][unit] 100% of class library tests pass
Pavel Ozhdikhin wrote:
We have to evolving systems - classlib and DRLVM. To check commits
On the 0x223 day of Apache Harmony Alexey Varlamov wrote:
2006/11/16, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Pavel Ozhdikhin wrote:
We have to evolving systems - classlib and DRLVM. To check commits to
classlib we need a stable DRLVM which can pass 100% of HUT. Otherwise it's
impossible to use
Egor Pasko wrote:
I am for (2) too. But a small correction: rollback is not always
reasonable. We can explicitly agree if we do rollback or fix ASAP (as
we did with TM and launcher).
Of course, thank you -- it is always better to fix it and move forward
when that can be done quickly rather
Pavel Ozhdikhin wrote:
Sorry to say but it actually does not work until there is no notifications
to the mailing list and no immediate reaction to the regressions.
I agree -- we need to be alerted to failures, and respond to them.
Regards,
Tim
--
Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
IBM Java
Alexei Fedotov wrote:
Folks,
According to http://harmonytest.org, today 100% of class library unit
tests
pass on DRLVM. Thank you all! It takes 44 days for the great team we
are.
Awesome!
--
Paulex Yang
China Software Development Lab
IBM
16 Nov 2006 17:15:14 +0600, Egor Pasko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
On the 0x223 day of Apache Harmony Alexey Varlamov wrote:
2006/11/16, Tim Ellison [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Pavel Ozhdikhin wrote:
We have to evolving systems - classlib and DRLVM. To check commits to
classlib we need a stable DRLVM
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
why not?
Because the full-stack testing is appropriate for CI systems that are
running full-time to catch bugs. That's what our build-test
infrastructure is all about.
Asking DRLVM developers (and conversely, classlib developers) to run 1+
hours of tests for even
Tim Ellison wrote:
Pavel Ozhdikhin wrote:
We have to evolving systems - classlib and DRLVM. To check commits to
classlib we need a stable DRLVM which can pass 100% of HUT. Otherwise it's
impossible to use DRLVM for pre-commit testing - you never know whether
your
test fail because of your
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
And I hope we will have other workloads running on Harmony nightly and
reporting regressions to the list.
Speaking of which, is there a J9 for x86_64 available?
If so, I could start getting a more complete testing scenario on the
server that runs gump
--
Stefano.
Well let's see how often we will break CI systems. If we break
it twice a day then pre-commit testing needs to be strengthened.
BTW if compile in release mode then all classlib tests run 35 minutes
on DRLVM. Once we fix DRLVM to run with the fork mode once
it will be even faster...
Thanks,
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
Well let's see how often we will break CI systems. If we break
it twice a day then pre-commit testing needs to be strengthened.
Right. Exactly. Iterate and adapt.
BTW if compile in release mode then all classlib tests run 35 minutes
on DRLVM. Once we fix DRLVM to
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
And I hope we will have other workloads running on Harmony nightly and
reporting regressions to the list.
Speaking of which, is there a J9 for x86_64 available?
Nope, we have not put a Harmony VME up on Developerworks for x86_64.
And
: Tim Ellison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 12:37 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [drlvm][unit] 100% of class library tests pass
Pavel Ozhdikhin wrote:
We have to evolving systems - classlib and DRLVM. To check commits to
classlib we need
results to http://harmonytest.org.
With best regards,
Alexei Fedotov,
Intel Java XML Engineering
-Original Message-
From: Tim Ellison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 12:37 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [drlvm][unit] 100% of class
3:05 AM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [drlvm][unit] 100% of class library tests pass
Alexei Fedotov wrote:
Pavel,
The life started showing that you were correct. Today there were no
report on http://harmonytest.org. Even if I would like to be a living
notification, I
Oops, I've missed:
* Andrew Zhang for reviewing class library patches and helpful discussions
On 11/16/06, Alexei Fedotov [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Folks,
According to http://harmonytest.org, today 100% of class library unit tests
pass on DRLVM. Thank you all! It takes 44 days for the great
Alexei Fedotov wrote:
Folks,
According to http://harmonytest.org, today 100% of class library unit tests
pass on DRLVM.
Yay!
There are still open issues with reliability, multiprocessor and other
special configurations, so the page
http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Unit_Tests_Pass_on_DRLVM
Be sure to not miss anyone :) This was a great community effort, with
everyone pitching in.
DRLVM is now a full peer to J9 in Harmony testing. :) We still need
to use J9 (and another VM that happens to work with our classlibrary),
as a sanity check, but we should from now on use DRLVM in
On 11/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Be sure to not miss anyone :) This was a great community effort, with
everyone pitching in.
DRLVM is now a full peer to J9 in Harmony testing. :) We still need
to use J9 (and another VM that happens to work with our classlibrary),
as
Pavel Ozhdikhin wrote:
On 11/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Be sure to not miss anyone :) This was a great community effort, with
everyone pitching in.
DRLVM is now a full peer to J9 in Harmony testing. :) We still need
to use J9 (and another VM that happens to work
why not?
2006/11/16, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Pavel Ozhdikhin wrote:
On 11/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Be sure to not miss anyone :) This was a great community effort, with
everyone pitching in.
DRLVM is now a full peer to J9 in Harmony testing. :)
2006/11/16, Mikhail Loenko [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
why not?
But what benefit it would bring? build test in DRLVM takes too much
time already, I'm afraid people will just stop using it :(
This is analogous to enforcing full testing in classlib for every
change regardless of module. Evidently this is
28 matches
Mail list logo
