Mikhail Loenko wrote:
2006/10/16, Mikhail Fursov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On 10/16/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> Isn't it time to define the official set of supported platforms? ;)
After reading the neighbour threads about hardware available for
commiters
and precommit criteria I think that we have no officially supported
platforms today (and IMO this is wrong).
What is the difference in your vision between official supported and
official not supported platforms?
IMHO the difference is we back commit if it breaks officially supported
platform and not necessarily do if it breaks unsupported one
If pressed, I would assert that we officially* support Windows XP x86
and Linux** x86.
* = I say "officially" with the caveat that we are all volunteers here,
and support for a platform will only remain as long as people are
willing to volunteer to support it.
** = We should define to be a set of popular platforms. I'll start a
new thread so we can put this to bed and get back to work ;)
geir
Thanks,
Mikhail
--
Mikhail Fursov
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
