Mikhail, thanks for your comments.
SY, Alexey 2007/4/15, Mikhail Fursov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
After >10 runs of jEdit I've found it hangs couple of times during startup. It can be a threading issue and jEdit here is not a good reproducer. We have several easy to reproduce JIRA issues for threading subsystem and I hope fixing them will improve jEdit stats too. On 4/15/07, Mikhail Fursov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I also tried jEdit today: (version 4.3 pre9) - it started fine in default > JIT mode. I opened and edited several documents and found no errors. I'll > try more with different verification levels enabled. > > On 4/13/07, Alexei Zakharov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > jEdit? > > > But I'm not sure that it works ok on current class library :) > > > > I've tried to run jEdit on Harmony recently. I was able to start it on > > IBM VME only - it fails to start on JITed version of DRLVM and startup > > takes tooo long in DRLVM's interpreter mode (however, it starts). But > > even on IBM VME it is not able to work longer than about 10 minutes. > > > > Regards, > > > > 2007/4/4, Alexey Petrenko < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > 2007/4/4, Stepan Mishura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > On 4/4/07, Alexey Petrenko wrote: > > > > <SNIP> > > > > > > > I'd like to propose the next approach that may help us to know > > about > > > > > > > instabilities: develop (or take existing one, for example, > > Eclipse > > > > > > > hello world) a scenario for testing stability and configure CC > > to run > > > > > > > it at all times. The stability scenario must be the only one > > scenario > > > > > > > for CC; it must be short (no longer then an hour), test JRE in > > stress > > > > > > > conditions and cover most of functionality. If the scenario > > fails then > > > > > > > all newly committed updates are subject for investigation and > > fix (or > > > > > > > rollback). > > > > > > Actually, I prefer something without GUI > > > > > I do not think that remove GUI testing from CC and other stability > > > > > > > testing is a good way to go. Because awt and swing modules are > > really > > > > > big and complicated pieces of code. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sorry for the confusion - I agree that we should continue running > > > > AWT/Swing tests under CC. But we are talking about scenario that can > > > > be used for testing stability in terms of race conditions. The first > > > > scenario that spread in my mind was Eclipse hello world testing > > > > scenario: it is quite short, verifies core functionality and so on. > > > > But Vladimir claimed that there might be some issues related to GUI > > > > testing and we may have a number of 'false alarms'. > > > In fact Eclipse does not use awt and swing at all so it can not be > > > used as a test for these modules. > > > > > > > > > > BTW, do you have any scenario in mind that can be used a stability > > > > criteria (of cause in terms of race conditions)? > > > jEdit? > > > But I'm not sure that it works ok on current class library :) > > > > > > SY, Alexey > > > > > > > > > or at least without using > > > > > > special 'GUI testing" tools. It should improve quality of this > > testing > > > > > > (than less tools than more predictable results :)) Current > > "Eclipse > > > > > > hello world" scenario based on the AutoIT for Win and X11GuiTest > > for > > > > > > Linux platform. Also we have this scenario based on API calls > > which > > > > > > should emulate GUI scenario. From these 2 approaches I prefer > > second > > > > > > to minimize 'false alarms'. Or may be some other scenarios > > (non-GUI)? > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, Vladimir > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thought? Objections? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks, > > > > > > > Stepan. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I read the discussion on naming, and M1, M2, ... is fine by > > me. How > > > > > > > > about we pick a proposed date for Apache Harmony M1? > > > > > > -- > > Alexei Zakharov, > > Intel ESSD > > > > > > -- > Mikhail Fursov -- Mikhail Fursov
