Alexey Petrenko wrote: > To be clear all these issues are not from migrating from previous > version of ICU to 3.8. But from removing Harmony code which duplicates > ICU code.
Yes. I'll admit that I misunderstood the original proposal. Is it possible to pick up the locale *data* from ICU rather than have our own copy? That would enable us to customize and update the locale information using ICU tools. > So we actually need to fix ICU not Harmony to get our performance and > other behaviors back. And the problem here could be that we are not > ICU and we do not have ICU committers, at least as far as I know. Thus > we can not be sure that needed patches will be integrated ASAP even if > we will create all needed patches our selves. True. The ICU project is set up to work in this area, if we can't reuse their work successfully in Harmony I think would be a great shame for both of us. > Moreover some patches can contradict with ICU vision. For example > HARMONY-5085. The problem there that the Harmony method starts to > return array of ICU classes instead of array of Harmony J2SE public > API classes. Array scanning with ICU -> Harmony classes conversion > will degrade performance. So the only way here to fix ICU to return > public api classes instead of ICU classes. And I'm not sure that ICU > project will be ready to integrate such a changes. I agree it is something we need to fix outside our mainline. > From the other hand I agree that we do not want to reinvent the wheel > and keep and support all this internationalization stuff in Harmony if > we can delegate it to another suitable project. But this project need > to fit Harmony needs :) Yep, some of that text handling is complex, and if we can defer it to ICU that would be best. > I suggest the following as a result... > 1. Revert the patch which removes Harmony code which duplicates ICU. > 2. File all the found issues to ICU database. > 3. Create as much patches for ICU to fit Harmony needs as we can and > provide them to ICU. > 4. Wait until all these patches will be integrated and new ICU release come. > 5. Remove ICU duplicating functionality again. > > Thoughts? Objections? I agree. We should hear Tony's suggestion since he has been working in this area. Regards, Tim
