Let me get my Outrigger bug fixed, and then I'll send you a public ssh key.
In the long term, maybe we should ask around the user list. If anyone is
using River on SPARC, they may be motivated to give away their old
hardware or provide access to enable SPARC support.
Patricia
On 1/22/2011 4:42 PM, Peter Firmstone wrote:
Patricia Shanahan wrote:
Anything I can do to help with that? Unfortunately, I don't have
access to any SPARC systems.
Hmm,
I might be able to help there, from memory, if you give me a public ssh
key, I can set up a home directory for you on my machine, containing
said key, making it possible for you to log in remotely, I can even set
up a zone for you if you wish.
Currently the sparc hardware I have is aging (Ultra II and Ultra III
based) , the software is relatively current, being Solaris 10,
considering this is a volunteer effort, I'm not sure how much longer
I'll be able to provide support for sparc hardware, so if it doesn't
prove worthwhile, we can consider dropping support for sparc, unless
someone objects.
I'm a Mech Engineer, so these are sparc workstations, with maxed out ram
and dual xvr-1000's.
Anyone want 2 pairs of Crystal Eyes 3D glasses and accessories?
Cheers,
Peter.
Patricia
On 1/22/2011 4:21 PM, Peter Firmstone wrote:
Ok, I should have another attempt at trying to figure out why tests are
failing on Solaris sparc and Java 1.6 too.
Peter.
Patricia Shanahan wrote:
I have a bug fix I need to integrate and test, replacing the FastList
in outrigger with one that works even under mixed add/remove stress
load. I'm planning to use this as a vehicle for setting up structures
for unit benchmarks, but that can wait. I'll go ahead with the bug fix
ASAP.
Patricia
On 1/22/2011 3:02 PM, Peter Firmstone wrote:
In preparation for release, we need to determine if everyone's happy
with the current trunk, so it can be branched and released.
I like to make any changes prior to branching if possible, which means
the branch is a snapshot of the current trunk.
I noticed there appear to be some unfinished discussions regarding
configuration and it appears that we have three configuration
systems at
present and some concern of about adding a new project dependency.
At present River has a provider system which allows plugging in
different configuration providers, which means that it doesn't create
any dependency's for clients or application code, instead the
configuration can be chosen at deployment time, there may be an
advantage in having another choice for configuration for new
developers
already familiar with Velocity.
Can we finish the discussion?
Cheers,
Peter.
