This depends on people's expectation. If we consider the lines of code, I saw DRLVM had a large number of check-ins in the past month. Also the discussions on startup time, hashcode opt, global propagation, etc., incurred interesting comments/insights, which turned into some good improvements in DRLVM.
One thing we should take into consideration is, JVM is entering a stable period in its development. It is not like the period of functionality development, since there is no major missing functionality in DRLVM now. The new developments are more for improvements. For example, when Wenlong saw the startup time had a problem, he initiated the discussions, and got feedbacks, then worked in it and came up with a patch. I reviewed the code, and think it's a good patch accomplishing its goal. This is a pretty good example of community-development. Of course, more discussions are welcome. Well I personally have no real concern about the development. But I agree with you that, a couple of committers are not active recently... Thanks, xiaofeng On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 5:51 AM, Nathan Beyer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Should we mention the derth of DRLVM development. From a community > perspective I am a little concerned about it. > -Nathan > > On 12/10/08, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Our regular update to the Apache Board is now due. >> >> I have a draft in the Wiki here >> http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Board200812 >> >> Please take a look and amend as you see fit, especially PMC members as >> it is a PMC report although we always welcome all comments from the >> community. >> >> Regards, >> Tim >> > > -- > Sent from my mobile device > -- http://xiao-feng.blogspot.com
