On the 0x21C day of Apache Harmony Mikhail Loenko wrote: > 2006/11/9, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > > > > > 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) > > +1 for 'zero regression' unless explicitely agreed
I am +1 for "'zero regression' unless explicitely agreed" at least for (c/jit-)unit, kernel, classlib tests. Do you think of including Eclipse UT, DaCapo, etc. to the 'zero regression' set? That would probably be good, I am afraid of too heavy checks for each small patch. > Thanks, > Mikhail > > > > > > > > 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 > > > > > > > > -- Egor Pasko
