Re: GNU Classpath 0.06 created

2003-09-25 Thread Mark Wielaard
Hi,

On Sat, 2003-08-23 at 19:51, Per Bothner wrote:
 If you've created a cvs tag, and given it a real version number,
 I'd call it a release, even if it's not a 1.0 relase.  alpha.gnu.org
 has outlived its usefulness (evidenced by the fact that it is little
 used) now that alpha code is available in CVS for most projects.
 
 Note that alpha.gnu.org is not mirrored the way ftp.gnu.org is.

The 0.06 release is now finally up on ftp://alpha.gnu.org/gnu/classpath/
I changed the webpages to point again to this location for downloading
it. And added a little news item to the Savannah pages.

I did ask about moving it to ftp.gnu.org, and about putting back older
releases and putting up daily snapshot releases, but they didn't
currently have time to do that. They are looking for an extra system
administrator BTW so in the future these things will hopefully be
handled a little smoother. See http://www.gnu.org/jobs/fsf-sysadmin.html

Cheers,

Mark


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
___
Classpath mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath


RE: GNU Classpath 0.06 created

2003-08-26 Thread Qiong Cai
Hi,

Does ORP 1.10 work with this new release?  After browsing through the
mailing list archives, I cannot find why ORP is broken with the
classpath.  I really like to do some experiments on some server
benchmarks like tomcat/jboss and jbb by using ORP+classpath, and I
believe the latest classpath support these benchmarks arleady.  


Qiong






On Sat, 2003-08-23 at 18:07, Per Bothner wrote:
 You don't put releases on alpha.gnu.org - you put them on ftp.gnu.org.

 You can put pre-releases on alpha.gnu.org, but if you already have a 
 release there seems little point.

My thinking was that the 0.0x releases are actually the pre-releases
while we work towards the first real GNU Classpath 1.0 release. People
can combine these pre-releases with their own VMs like gcj, kissme,
jikesRVM, Jaos, etc already do. But as long as we don't have at least a
minimum of functionality to offer (we are hoping that 1.0 will have the
equivalent functionality as core libraries that come with some
proprietary 1.1 JDKs) and a stable/maintainable VM interface we cannot
call it a real release. We do hope that people try these pre-releases
out to create compilers and/or VM environments so they can give us
feedback what should be improved for the real 1.0 release. (And I also
don't have access to ftp.gnu.org)

Cheers,

Mark



___
Classpath mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath



___
Classpath mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath


RE: GNU Classpath 0.06 created

2003-08-25 Thread Mark Wielaard
Hi,

On Mon, 2003-08-25 at 08:07, Qiong Cai wrote:
 Does ORP 1.10 work with this new release?  After browsing through the
 mailing list archives, I cannot find why ORP is broken with the
 classpath.

I don't think Orp will work out of the box with the 0.06 snapshot.
But the changes since the last version aren't that big. All changes
relevant to VM implementers are listed in the NEWS file. Most will just
require updating some vm/reference classes. If you contact the Orp
developers about this please let us know if/when it works.

  I really like to do some experiments on some server
 benchmarks like tomcat/jboss and jbb by using ORP+classpath, and I
 believe the latest classpath support these benchmarks arleady.  

I would be very interested in how this works out.
Note that there are some patches by the JikesRVM hackers for
javax.naming that are labeled as JBoss improvements but that didn't make
it for 0.06.

Cheers,

Mark



___
Classpath mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath


Re: GNU Classpath 0.06 created

2003-08-24 Thread Per Bothner
Mark Wielaard wrote:

Although I don't have access yet to alpha.gnu.org to publish the release
I have already created the 0.06 release tarball. I also tagged the CVS
tree as 'classpath-0_06-release'.
You don't put releases on alpha.gnu.org - you put them on ftp.gnu.org.
You can put pre-releases on alpha.gnu.org, but if you already have
a release there seems little point.
--
--Per Bothner
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://per.bothner.com/


___
Classpath mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath


Re: GNU Classpath 0.06 created

2003-08-24 Thread Mark Wielaard
Hi,

On Sat, 2003-08-23 at 18:07, Per Bothner wrote:
 You don't put releases on alpha.gnu.org - you put them on ftp.gnu.org.
 You can put pre-releases on alpha.gnu.org, but if you already have
 a release there seems little point.

My thinking was that the 0.0x releases are actually the pre-releases
while we work towards the first real GNU Classpath 1.0 release. People
can combine these pre-releases with their own VMs like gcj, kissme,
jikesRVM, Jaos, etc already do. But as long as we don't have at least a
minimum of functionality to offer (we are hoping that 1.0 will have the
equivalent functionality as core libraries that come with some
proprietary 1.1 JDKs) and a stable/maintainable VM interface we cannot
call it a real release. We do hope that people try these pre-releases
out to create compilers and/or VM environments so they can give us
feedback what should be improved for the real 1.0 release.
(And I also don't have access to ftp.gnu.org)

Cheers,

Mark



___
Classpath mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath


Re: GNU Classpath 0.06 created

2003-08-23 Thread Per Bothner
Mark Wielaard wrote:

My thinking was that the 0.0x releases are actually the pre-releases
while we work towards the first real GNU Classpath 1.0 release. People
can combine these pre-releases with their own VMs like gcj, kissme,
jikesRVM, Jaos, etc already do. But as long as we don't have at least a
minimum of functionality to offer (we are hoping that 1.0 will have the
equivalent functionality as core libraries that come with some
proprietary 1.1 JDKs) and a stable/maintainable VM interface we cannot
call it a real release.
If you've created a cvs tag, and given it a real version number,
I'd call it a release, even if it's not a 1.0 relase.  alpha.gnu.org
has outlived its usefulness (evidenced by the fact that it is little
used) now that alpha code is available in CVS for most projects.
Note that alpha.gnu.org is not mirrored the way ftp.gnu.org is.
--
--Per Bothner
[EMAIL PROTECTED]   http://per.bothner.com/


___
Classpath mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/classpath