On 25 May 2006 at 13:30, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Mark Hindess wrote: > > On 25 May 2006 at 7:46, Geir Magnusson Jr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Tim Ellison wrote: > >>> Geir Magnusson Jr wrote: > >>>> Tim Ellison wrote: > >>>>> This is still work in progress, but thought it would be good to give a > >>>>> quick update on where I am at the moment: > >>> <snip> > >>>>> Now you can run javac. > >>>> Very cute! Do you intend module/tools to remain not part of the build? > >>> It will become part of the build once it is as-good-as done. > >>> > >>> I'm trying to do a balancing act between /not/ dumping my junk into SVN > >>> as I go along, and developing in the open | collaboratively. > >>> Suggestions for re-balancing are more than welcome. > >> Only suggestion is to do a branches/tim/stuff1, work in there if you > >> want people to comment (with the bonus of having it in SVN in case of > >> problem). > >> > >> It's COW so the space usage won't be that bad, and you can just delete > >> when done. > > > > While that's true, I think that development on branches has other costs: > > > > * merging back into trunk > > > > * fewer people will pay attention - nothing personal but I might be > > less inclined to scan commits in branches/tim than trunk ;-) > > Right, but right now he's not putting anything in trunk. So you have no > hope of seeing anything. > > And it doesn't matter. If you aren't interested in what he's doing, > don't look at it. if you are, you are engaged anyway. > > > Personally, I think development is moving fast enough that it's not a > > problem having it in trunk. If it hadn't been in trunk, I might have > > been less inclined to test it ... and not had the incentive to fix the > > bugs (HARMONY-510) on my platform of choice. > > Are we talking about two different things? Tim was saying that he > wanted to avoid dumping 'junk' into SVN, yet wants to work more in the open. > > Working in a branch is a great way to do it. > > > > > Obviously, we should avoid breaking things like this for too long but I > > think the occasional breakage is a fair price to pay for not having the > > other costs. > > > > Of course, I seem to be the only one who even noticed this problem. > > Which problem?
HARMONY-510 is causing every java invocation to exit with a glibc memory corruption crash. Which causes all the IBM vme/harmony hosted bits of our builds to break - they "work" but ant sees the bad return code. > It's going to be the case that people will want to go off into a > 'corner' and try something. it's nice that they can do it so others can > watch, help, participate, and still it is out of the mainstream > codebase until that person or people want to bring it in (or propose to > bring it in). > > The merging would be their problem, just as it would be if they were > just working at home or in the office on a private copy. > > The benefits seem obvious. Sure, yes. I missed the point. You are absolutely right. I thought Tim was concerned because he'd already dumped "junk" into svn. ;-) I was pointing out that I didn't think it was a big deal - and anyway it's really cool "junk" that I like to see. -Mark. --------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
