Mikhail Loenko wrote:
2006/10/17, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
> 2006/10/17, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>>
>>
>> Mikhail Fursov wrote:
> I think if we decide to support a platform then we define a set of
tests
> that
> must pass on that platform after each commit and we do roll back if
they
> fail. That is how I understand "support"
Lets define support as passing >90% of classlib unit and
smoke/c-unit/kernel in DRLVM
It might be a criteria for addition to the set of supported, but can't
be a definition.
Logically there could be a platform that we don't know, but that
platform could
pass 99% of the tests, do you think we can support a platform we don't
have any
idea about?
LOL
No. We will clearly have to decide to support a given platform, and
agree on it as a community. But if someone is working on it, I think
that suggesting we are looking for at least 90% passing is a reasonable
rule of thumb for people to shoot for.
geir
Thanks,
Mikhail
geir
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
