In message <4a953190.2020...@googlemail.com>, Oliver Deakin writes: > > Mark Hindess wrote: > > I've merged the latest commits for 5.0M11 across to the java6 branch > > at r807351. Obviously this week we should focus on testing 5.0M11 > > (r807222) so we can hopefully start a vote on Friday but feel free to > > start testing this revision of the java6 branch so that we can consider > > whether we could make a 6.0M1 release a week after the 5.0M11 release. > > > > I see quite a few test failures but that doesn't mean we shouldn't > > release. We have to start somewhere and we can try to reduce the > > failures for subsequent releases. > > > > What do others think? > > > > Sounds good to me. I just ran the tests on Windows x86 and I see 81 > failures and 43 errors. The vast majority are JDWP tests (known and I > have raised JIRAs for them - I don't think these should hold up 6.0M1) > and TreeMap tests (71 failures and 18 errors). > > The cause of the TreeMap failures is not obvious (could be differences > between Java 5 and 6 spec that the tests are not reflecting?), but since > they seem centralised and all the other classlib tests seem in good > shape, I would be willing to have a JIRA raised for these with a target > of fixing them for 6.0M2 and go ahead with the milestone. > > Does anyone see these same failures/agree?
Yes. That's pretty similar to what I see on linux/x86_64. I agree it shouldn't stop us making a release. Tim, yes. I agree we should end the code freeze on classlib/trunk and jdktools/trunk (but obviously *not* drlvm) when we conclude the 5.0M11 vote. Regards, Mark.
