Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

Mikhail Loenko wrote:

2006/10/25, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:



Stepan Mishura wrote:
> On 10/16/06, *Geir Magnusson Jr.* wrote:
>
> We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
> community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms 
that we as

> a community commit to support.
>
> I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
> community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are 
users
> that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find 
and fix

> bugs that specifically affect that platform"
>
> Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see 
what's
> popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in 
indicating what
> you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To 
start,

> using a broad brush :
>
>
> Geir,
>
> I'd like to summarize the discussion to put the summary to web-site. 
I'm

> going to add something like: "We aimed to support wide range of
> different platforms. The main criteria if platform is supported or not
> is that there are people interesting in running test on regular base,
> reporting build status, finding and fixing bugs for that platform. A
> list of currently supported platforms can be found at
> http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_VM_on. "
>
> BTW, I think we can also  use as indication if a platform is supported
> if someone set up Harmony build-and-test infra on the platform and
> regularly run it.
>
> Comments? Objections?

That captures my feeling of it, for the most part.  I think it's still
early - we'll rally around a few now, but as our platform and build
becomes more portable, I expect more activity and having to revisit this
question again.


Well, we'll probably have to revisit this but if we don't have
something to revisit
we'll have to discuss it from the beginning. So, I'm for publishing a
preliminary
decision on the site (or at list wiki).


Yes - that's my point.  Lets stop talking about this and get something 
up there.  We'll just fix it as we need to.  It's too early right now to 
polish the nosecone like this...


geir



Thanks,
Mikhail



geir

>
> Thanks,
> Stepan.
>
>
> Windows
> ===
> Windows XP x86
>
> Linux
> =
> Ubuntu 6 x86
> Ubuntu 5 x86
> RHEL  (version ?) x86
> FC (version ?) x86
> SUSE (verion ?) x86
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Stepan Mishura
> Intel Middleware Products Division
>
> --
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

Egor Pasko wrote:

On the 0x20D day of Apache Harmony Stepan Mishura wrote:

On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:

We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
a community commit to support.

I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
bugs that specifically affect that platform"

Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what
you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
using a broad brush :


Geir,

I'd like to summarize the discussion to put the summary to web-site. I'm
going to add something like: "We aimed to support wide range of different
platforms. The main criteria if platform is supported or not is that there
are people interesting in running test on regular base, reporting build
status, finding and fixing bugs for that platform. A list of currently
supported platforms can be found at
http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_VM_on. "


Stepan, that's "HDK runs on the following platforms".
DRLVM guys do not use HDK (correct me here). So, I was expecting to
see: "Harmony (DRLVM) builds and runs on the following platforms".


"Harmony builds and runs on the following platforms"



"Runs" is something more common than "builds", and we want "builds" :)
So, we still mean different things when we say "supported". (not my
fav. word)

Does it make sense to create a separate page for that or enhance the
existing one? Or, maybe, it does not make sense at all? ;o)


BTW, I think we can also  use as indication if a platform is supported if
someone set up Harmony build-and-test infra on the platform and regularly
run it.


Yes :)



Comments? Objections?

Thanks,
Stepan.


Windows

===
Windows XP x86

Linux
=
Ubuntu 6 x86
Ubuntu 5 x86
RHEL  (version ?) x86
FC (version ?) x86
SUSE (verion ?) x86





--
Stepan Mishura
Intel Middleware Products Division

--
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Egor Pasko]

On the 0x20E day of Apache Harmony Stepan Mishura wrote:
> On 26 Oct 2006 10:49:10 +0700, Egor Pasko wrote:
> >
> > On the 0x20D day of Apache Harmony Stepan Mishura wrote:
> > > On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> > > >
> > > > We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
> > > > community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we
> > as
> > > > a community commit to support.
> > > >
> > > > I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
> > > > community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
> > > > that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and
> > fix
> > > > bugs that specifically affect that platform"
> > > >
> > > > Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see
> > what's
> > > > popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating
> > what
> > > > you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
> > > > using a broad brush :
> > >
> > >
> > > Geir,
> > >
> > > I'd like to summarize the discussion to put the summary to web-site. I'm
> > > going to add something like: "We aimed to support wide range of
> > different
> > > platforms. The main criteria if platform is supported or not is that
> > there
> > > are people interesting in running test on regular base, reporting build
> > > status, finding and fixing bugs for that platform. A list of currently
> > > supported platforms can be found at
> > > http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_VM_on. "
> >
> > Stepan, that's "HDK runs on the following platforms".
> > DRLVM guys do not use HDK (correct me here). So, I was expecting to
> > see: "Harmony (DRLVM) builds and runs on the following platforms".
> >
> > "Runs" is something more common than "builds", and we want "builds" :)
> > So, we still mean different things when we say "supported". (not my
> > fav. word)
> >
> > Does it make sense to create a separate page for that or enhance the
> > existing one? Or, maybe, it does not make sense at all? ;o)
> 
> 
> 
> IMO, it makes sense to fix results of the discussion. From my POV the main
> point is how we define "support" and what it means for us. After we agree on
> that we can move to details.

OK, let's somehow fix the results!

-- 
Egor Pasko, Intel Managed Runtime Division

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Stepan Mishura]

On 26 Oct 2006 10:49:10 +0700, Egor Pasko wrote:


On the 0x20D day of Apache Harmony Stepan Mishura wrote:
> On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> >
> > We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
> > community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we
as
> > a community commit to support.
> >
> > I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
> > community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
> > that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and
fix
> > bugs that specifically affect that platform"
> >
> > Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see
what's
> > popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating
what
> > you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
> > using a broad brush :
>
>
> Geir,
>
> I'd like to summarize the discussion to put the summary to web-site. I'm
> going to add something like: "We aimed to support wide range of
different
> platforms. The main criteria if platform is supported or not is that
there
> are people interesting in running test on regular base, reporting build
> status, finding and fixing bugs for that platform. A list of currently
> supported platforms can be found at
> http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_VM_on. "

Stepan, that's "HDK runs on the following platforms".
DRLVM guys do not use HDK (correct me here). So, I was expecting to
see: "Harmony (DRLVM) builds and runs on the following platforms".

"Runs" is something more common than "builds", and we want "builds" :)
So, we still mean different things when we say "supported". (not my
fav. word)

Does it make sense to create a separate page for that or enhance the
existing one? Or, maybe, it does not make sense at all? ;o)




IMO, it makes sense to fix results of the discussion. From my POV the main
point is how we define "support" and what it means for us. After we agree on
that we can move to details.

Thanks,
Stepan.



> BTW, I think we can also  use as indication if a platform is supported
if
> someone set up Harmony build-and-test infra on the platform and
regularly
> run it.
>
> Comments? Objections?
>
> Thanks,
> Stepan.
>
>
> Windows
> > ===
> > Windows XP x86
> >
> > Linux
> > =
> > Ubuntu 6 x86
> > Ubuntu 5 x86
> > RHEL  (version ?) x86
> > FC (version ?) x86
> > SUSE (verion ?) x86
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Stepan Mishura
> Intel Middleware Products Division

--
Egor Pasko, Intel Managed Runtime Division





--
Stepan Mishura
Intel Middleware Products Division

--
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Stepan Mishura]

On 10/26/06, Mikhail Loenko wrote:


2006/10/25, Geir Magnusson Jr. :
>
>
> Stepan Mishura wrote:
> > On 10/16/06, *Geir Magnusson Jr.* wrote:
> >
> > We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
> > community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that
we as
> > a community commit to support.
> >
> > I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
> > community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are
users
> > that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find
and fix
> > bugs that specifically affect that platform"
> >
> > Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see
what's
> > popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in
indicating what
> > you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To
start,
> > using a broad brush :
> >
> >
> > Geir,
> >
> > I'd like to summarize the discussion to put the summary to web-site.
I'm
> > going to add something like: "We aimed to support wide range of
> > different platforms. The main criteria if platform is supported or not
> > is that there are people interesting in running test on regular base,
> > reporting build status, finding and fixing bugs for that platform. A
> > list of currently supported platforms can be found at
> > http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_VM_on. "
> >
> > BTW, I think we can also  use as indication if a platform is supported
> > if someone set up Harmony build-and-test infra on the platform and
> > regularly run it.
> >
> > Comments? Objections?
>
> That captures my feeling of it, for the most part.  I think it's still
> early - we'll rally around a few now, but as our platform and build
> becomes more portable, I expect more activity and having to revisit this
> question again.

Well, we'll probably have to revisit this but if we don't have
something to revisit
we'll have to discuss it from the beginning. So, I'm for publishing a
preliminary
decision on the site (or at list wiki).




+1

-Stepan.

Thanks,

Mikhail

>
> geir
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Stepan.
> >
> >
> > Windows
> > ===
> > Windows XP x86
> >
> > Linux
> > =
> > Ubuntu 6 x86
> > Ubuntu 5 x86
> > RHEL  (version ?) x86
> > FC (version ?) x86
> > SUSE (verion ?) x86
>




--
Stepan Mishura
Intel Middleware Products Division

--
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Mikhail Loenko]

2006/10/25, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:



Stepan Mishura wrote:
> On 10/16/06, *Geir Magnusson Jr.* wrote:
>
> We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
> community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
> a community commit to support.
>
> I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
> community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
> that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
> bugs that specifically affect that platform"
>
> Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
> popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what
> you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
> using a broad brush :
>
>
> Geir,
>
> I'd like to summarize the discussion to put the summary to web-site. I'm
> going to add something like: "We aimed to support wide range of
> different platforms. The main criteria if platform is supported or not
> is that there are people interesting in running test on regular base,
> reporting build status, finding and fixing bugs for that platform. A
> list of currently supported platforms can be found at
> http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_VM_on. "
>
> BTW, I think we can also  use as indication if a platform is supported
> if someone set up Harmony build-and-test infra on the platform and
> regularly run it.
>
> Comments? Objections?

That captures my feeling of it, for the most part.  I think it's still
early - we'll rally around a few now, but as our platform and build
becomes more portable, I expect more activity and having to revisit this
question again.


Well, we'll probably have to revisit this but if we don't have
something to revisit
we'll have to discuss it from the beginning. So, I'm for publishing a
preliminary
decision on the site (or at list wiki).

Thanks,
Mikhail



geir

>
> Thanks,
> Stepan.
>
>
> Windows
> ===
> Windows XP x86
>
> Linux
> =
> Ubuntu 6 x86
> Ubuntu 5 x86
> RHEL  (version ?) x86
> FC (version ?) x86
> SUSE (verion ?) x86
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Stepan Mishura
> Intel Middleware Products Division
>
> --
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Egor Pasko]

On the 0x20D day of Apache Harmony Stepan Mishura wrote:
> On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> >
> > We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
> > community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
> > a community commit to support.
> >
> > I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
> > community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
> > that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
> > bugs that specifically affect that platform"
> >
> > Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
> > popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what
> > you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
> > using a broad brush :
> 
> 
> Geir,
> 
> I'd like to summarize the discussion to put the summary to web-site. I'm
> going to add something like: "We aimed to support wide range of different
> platforms. The main criteria if platform is supported or not is that there
> are people interesting in running test on regular base, reporting build
> status, finding and fixing bugs for that platform. A list of currently
> supported platforms can be found at
> http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_VM_on. "

Stepan, that's "HDK runs on the following platforms".
DRLVM guys do not use HDK (correct me here). So, I was expecting to
see: "Harmony (DRLVM) builds and runs on the following platforms".

"Runs" is something more common than "builds", and we want "builds" :)
So, we still mean different things when we say "supported". (not my
fav. word)

Does it make sense to create a separate page for that or enhance the
existing one? Or, maybe, it does not make sense at all? ;o)

> 
> BTW, I think we can also  use as indication if a platform is supported if
> someone set up Harmony build-and-test infra on the platform and regularly
> run it.
> 
> Comments? Objections?
> 
> Thanks,
> Stepan.
> 
> 
> Windows
> > ===
> > Windows XP x86
> >
> > Linux
> > =
> > Ubuntu 6 x86
> > Ubuntu 5 x86
> > RHEL  (version ?) x86
> > FC (version ?) x86
> > SUSE (verion ?) x86
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Stepan Mishura
> Intel Middleware Products Division
> 
> --
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

-- 
Egor Pasko, Intel Managed Runtime Division

RE: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Morozova, Nadezhda]

Ok, thanks all, I see now.
Can I suggest that we define the supported platforms (the term itself +
the list of currently supported combinations) on the site. We can also
keep a Wiki page for related issues.
The platform support info could go to the download-snapshots page.

Thank you, 
Nadya Morozova
 

-Original Message-
From: Tim Ellison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 7:02 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

I agree with Salikh -- the wiki will never keep up if you expect such
frequent manual updates.  That's a job for the test results' collator.

Regards,
Tim

Salikh Zakirov wrote:
> Morozova, Nadezhda wrote:
>> My two cents...
>>
>>>> I do not understand the lifecycle of this page. If I report today
>> that
>>> my
>>>> platform works OK, but the next commit brokes it, who will update
the
>>> page?
>>>
>>> IMHO if the next commit breakes the work-ok-platform and if you
notice
>>> it, why not to update the wiki page? Or you can let me know about
this
>>> bug and I'll make the update:)
>> Do you think we can add a note with the revision number? This way,
you
>> at least know that the code of  revision worked ok/failed on this
>> platform. Because such tests are done systematically, changing
revisions
>> would not take much time to update. 
> 
> -1
> 
> I think this is a conceptually incorrect approach
> to try to keep a relatively slowly changing wiki page up-to-date with
fast-paced commits.
> I believe this approach is doomed, and the status page is going to get
out-of-date 
> while it is being edited.
> 
> I would suggest the following "fix" to the approach:
> * Reserve the "supported platforms" notion for the developer releases
or snapshots,
> and do not use the term with respect to SVN trunk
> * Relate the list of "supported platforms" with the release management
process,
>   and describe the status of particular snapshots, and not SVN trunk
in general.
>  
> 
> 

-- 

Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Tim Ellison]

I agree with Salikh -- the wiki will never keep up if you expect such
frequent manual updates.  That's a job for the test results' collator.

Regards,
Tim

Salikh Zakirov wrote:
> Morozova, Nadezhda wrote:
>> My two cents...
>>
 I do not understand the lifecycle of this page. If I report today
>> that
>>> my
 platform works OK, but the next commit brokes it, who will update the
>>> page?
>>>
>>> IMHO if the next commit breakes the work-ok-platform and if you notice
>>> it, why not to update the wiki page? Or you can let me know about this
>>> bug and I'll make the update:)
>> Do you think we can add a note with the revision number? This way, you
>> at least know that the code of  revision worked ok/failed on this
>> platform. Because such tests are done systematically, changing revisions
>> would not take much time to update. 
> 
> -1
> 
> I think this is a conceptually incorrect approach
> to try to keep a relatively slowly changing wiki page up-to-date with 
> fast-paced commits.
> I believe this approach is doomed, and the status page is going to get 
> out-of-date 
> while it is being edited.
> 
> I would suggest the following "fix" to the approach:
> * Reserve the "supported platforms" notion for the developer releases or 
> snapshots,
> and do not use the term with respect to SVN trunk
> * Relate the list of "supported platforms" with the release management 
> process,
>   and describe the status of particular snapshots, and not SVN trunk in 
> general.
>  
> 
> 

-- 

Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Tim Ellison]

Stepan Mishura wrote:
> "We aimed to support wide range of different platforms. The main
> criteria if platform is supported or not is that there are people
> interesting in running test on regular base, reporting build status,
> finding and fixing bugs for that platform. A list of currently 
> supported platforms can be found at 
> http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_VM_on. "

Yes, this is a good summary (at least of my position ;-)  You may want
to weasel out of using the word 'support', but that's a nit.

Regards,
Tim

-- 

Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED])

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Salikh Zakirov]

Morozova, Nadezhda wrote:
> My two cents...
> 
>>> I do not understand the lifecycle of this page. If I report today
> that
>> my
>>> platform works OK, but the next commit brokes it, who will update the
>> page?
>>
>> IMHO if the next commit breakes the work-ok-platform and if you notice
>> it, why not to update the wiki page? Or you can let me know about this
>> bug and I'll make the update:)
> Do you think we can add a note with the revision number? This way, you
> at least know that the code of  revision worked ok/failed on this
> platform. Because such tests are done systematically, changing revisions
> would not take much time to update. 

-1

I think this is a conceptually incorrect approach
to try to keep a relatively slowly changing wiki page up-to-date with 
fast-paced commits.
I believe this approach is doomed, and the status page is going to get 
out-of-date 
while it is being edited.

I would suggest the following "fix" to the approach:
* Reserve the "supported platforms" notion for the developer releases or 
snapshots,
and do not use the term with respect to SVN trunk
* Relate the list of "supported platforms" with the release management process,
  and describe the status of particular snapshots, and not SVN trunk in general.
 

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

Yes - lets just get something up on the wiki, and we can discuss/tune 
from there.


(and yes, we need a link to this from the site)

geir


Konovalova, Svetlana wrote:

I suggest just to provide just the definition and to add a link from the
site to the corresponding wiki page.

Cheers,
Sveta

-Original Message-
From: Mikhail Loenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 1:29 PM

To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

yes, I mean the current definitions

Then we could discuss the lists

Thanks,
Mikhail

2006/10/25, Stepan Mishura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

On 10/25/06, Mikhail Loenko wrote:

does it make sense to put it on the site?



To put what? The definition of "supported platform" or/and the list of
supported platforms?

I think it makes sense to put at least the definition.

Thanks,
Stepan.

Thanks,

Mikhail

2006/10/25, Stepan Mishura

On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:

We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest

in

community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms

that we

as

a community commit to support.

I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are

users

that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find

and

fix

bugs that specifically affect that platform"

Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see

what's

popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in

indicating

what

you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To

start,

using a broad brush :


Geir,

I'd like to summarize the discussion to put the summary to

web-site. I'm

going to add something like: "We aimed to support wide range of

different

platforms. The main criteria if platform is supported or not is

that

there

are people interesting in running test on regular base, reporting

build

status, finding and fixing bugs for that platform. A list of

currently

supported platforms can be found at
http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_VM_on. "

BTW, I think we can also  use as indication if a platform is

supported

if

someone set up Harmony build-and-test infra on the platform and

regularly

run it.

Comments? Objections?

Thanks,
Stepan.


Windows

===
Windows XP x86

Linux
=
Ubuntu 6 x86
Ubuntu 5 x86
RHEL  (version ?) x86
FC (version ?) x86
SUSE (verion ?) x86



--
Stepan Mishura
Intel Middleware Products Division

--
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

Mikhail Fursov wrote:

On 10/25/06, Konovalova, Svetlana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Comments? Objections?



Wow! the only platform with bugs we have is  "Windows XP with VS.NET 2005
Community Edition" ! :)

I do not understand the lifecycle of this page. If I report today that my
platform works OK, but the next commit brokes it, who will update the page?
What is "works OK"? Builds and runs classlib/drlvm tests only?


Ah, wiki's.  The "chalk on the sidewalk" of documentation ;)

geir



Thanks,

Stepan.


Windows
> ===
> Windows XP x86
>
> Linux
> =
> Ubuntu 6 x86
> Ubuntu 5 x86
> RHEL  (version ?) x86
> FC (version ?) x86
> SUSE (verion ?) x86
>
>
>


--
Stepan Mishura
Intel Middleware Products Division

--
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

Konovalova, Svetlana wrote:
Stepan, 


I support you idea, but IMHO the page you pointed out to is out-of-date.
I suggest using
http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_Harmony_Development_Kit_
on  as it seems to be much more suitable. I tried to support it adding
up-to-date info and posting the discussion issues. I'll be glad if you
find the aforementioned page useful :)  



I don't think that's a good page, because I think that what you mention 
above is developer-focused, and our "support platforms" is an end-user 
concept.


geir


Cheers,
Sveta

-Original Message-
From: Stepan Mishura [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 11:46 AM

To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:

We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we

as

a community commit to support.

I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and

fix

bugs that specifically affect that platform"

Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see

what's

popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating

what

you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
using a broad brush :



Geir,

I'd like to summarize the discussion to put the summary to web-site. I'm
going to add something like: "We aimed to support wide range of
different
platforms. The main criteria if platform is supported or not is that
there
are people interesting in running test on regular base, reporting build
status, finding and fixing bugs for that platform. A list of currently
supported platforms can be found at
http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_VM_on. "

BTW, I think we can also  use as indication if a platform is supported
if
someone set up Harmony build-and-test infra on the platform and
regularly
run it.

Comments? Objections?

Thanks,
Stepan.


Windows

===
Windows XP x86

Linux
=
Ubuntu 6 x86
Ubuntu 5 x86
RHEL  (version ?) x86
FC (version ?) x86
SUSE (verion ?) x86

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

Stepan Mishura wrote:

On 10/16/06, *Geir Magnusson Jr.* wrote:

We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
a community commit to support.

I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
bugs that specifically affect that platform"

Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what
you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
using a broad brush :

 
Geir,
 
I'd like to summarize the discussion to put the summary to web-site. I'm 
going to add something like: "We aimed to support wide range of 
different platforms. The main criteria if platform is supported or not 
is that there are people interesting in running test on regular base, 
reporting build status, finding and fixing bugs for that platform. A 
list of currently supported platforms can be found at 
http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_VM_on. "
 
BTW, I think we can also  use as indication if a platform is supported 
if someone set up Harmony build-and-test infra on the platform and 
regularly run it.
 
Comments? Objections?


That captures my feeling of it, for the most part.  I think it's still 
early - we'll rally around a few now, but as our platform and build 
becomes more portable, I expect more activity and having to revisit this 
question again.


geir

 
Thanks,

Stepan.
 


Windows
===
Windows XP x86

Linux
=
Ubuntu 6 x86
Ubuntu 5 x86
RHEL  (version ?) x86
FC (version ?) x86
SUSE (verion ?) x86





--
Stepan Mishura
Intel Middleware Products Division

--
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Mikhail Fursov]

On 10/25/06, Stepan Mishura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


> I do not understand the lifecycle of this page. If I report today that
my
> platform works OK, but the next commit brokes it, who will update the
> page?


I guess - you'll update :-)



This is optimistic behaviour:). Let's try and see if it works.

I meant running Harmony's build-and-test infra. (IIUC it includes

classlib/vm tests but it can include other testing scenarios). You set up
it
on platform of your interest and report to the mailing list regularly
about
build/test status.



Your definition of "Works OK" could be interpreted in different ways for
different platforms. This is the only thing I do not like in it.

--
Mikhail Fursov

RE: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Konovalova, Svetlana]

I suggest just to provide just the definition and to add a link from the
site to the corresponding wiki page.

Cheers,
Sveta

-Original Message-
From: Mikhail Loenko [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 1:29 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

yes, I mean the current definitions

Then we could discuss the lists

Thanks,
Mikhail

2006/10/25, Stepan Mishura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On 10/25/06, Mikhail Loenko wrote:
> >
> > does it make sense to put it on the site?
>
>
>
> To put what? The definition of "supported platform" or/and the list of
> supported platforms?
>
> I think it makes sense to put at least the definition.
>
> Thanks,
> Stepan.
>
> Thanks,
> > Mikhail
> >
> > 2006/10/25, Stepan Mishura
> > > On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> > > >
> > > > We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest
in
> > > > community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms
that we
> > as
> > > > a community commit to support.
> > > >
> > > > I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
> > > > community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are
users
> > > > that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find
and
> > fix
> > > > bugs that specifically affect that platform"
> > > >
> > > > Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see
> > what's
> > > > popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in
indicating
> > what
> > > > you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To
start,
> > > > using a broad brush :
> > >
> > >
> > > Geir,
> > >
> > > I'd like to summarize the discussion to put the summary to
web-site. I'm
> > > going to add something like: "We aimed to support wide range of
> > different
> > > platforms. The main criteria if platform is supported or not is
that
> > there
> > > are people interesting in running test on regular base, reporting
build
> > > status, finding and fixing bugs for that platform. A list of
currently
> > > supported platforms can be found at
> > > http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_VM_on. "
> > >
> > > BTW, I think we can also  use as indication if a platform is
supported
> > if
> > > someone set up Harmony build-and-test infra on the platform and
> > regularly
> > > run it.
> > >
> > > Comments? Objections?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Stepan.
> > >
> > >
> > > Windows
> > > > ===
> > > > Windows XP x86
> > > >
> > > > Linux
> > > > =
> > > > Ubuntu 6 x86
> > > > Ubuntu 5 x86
> > > > RHEL  (version ?) x86
> > > > FC (version ?) x86
> > > > SUSE (verion ?) x86
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> --
> Stepan Mishura
> Intel Middleware Products Division
>
> --
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Stepan Mishura]

On 10/25/06, Mikhail Fursov wrote:


On 10/25/06, Konovalova, Svetlana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Comments? Objections?


Wow! the only platform with bugs we have is  "Windows XP with VS.NET 2005
Community Edition" ! :)

I do not understand the lifecycle of this page. If I report today that my
platform works OK, but the next commit brokes it, who will update the
page?



I guess - you'll update :-)


What is "works OK"? Builds and runs classlib/drlvm tests only?



I meant running Harmony's build-and-test infra. (IIUC it includes
classlib/vm tests but it can include other testing scenarios). You set up it
on platform of your interest and report to the mailing list regularly about
build/test status. Also you may wish to suggest a fix for the platform. Then
it will be clear for all that your platform is supported.

Thanks,
Stepan.

Thanks,

> Stepan.
>
>
> Windows
> > ===
> > Windows XP x86
> >
> > Linux
> > =
> > Ubuntu 6 x86
> > Ubuntu 5 x86
> > RHEL  (version ?) x86
> > FC (version ?) x86
> > SUSE (verion ?) x86
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Stepan Mishura
> Intel Middleware Products Division
>
> --
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>



--
Mikhail Fursov





--
Stepan Mishura
Intel Middleware Products Division

--
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Mikhail Loenko]

yes, I mean the current definitions

Then we could discuss the lists

Thanks,
Mikhail

2006/10/25, Stepan Mishura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

On 10/25/06, Mikhail Loenko wrote:
>
> does it make sense to put it on the site?



To put what? The definition of "supported platform" or/and the list of
supported platforms?

I think it makes sense to put at least the definition.

Thanks,
Stepan.

Thanks,
> Mikhail
>
> 2006/10/25, Stepan Mishura
> > On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> > >
> > > We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
> > > community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we
> as
> > > a community commit to support.
> > >
> > > I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
> > > community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
> > > that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and
> fix
> > > bugs that specifically affect that platform"
> > >
> > > Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see
> what's
> > > popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating
> what
> > > you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
> > > using a broad brush :
> >
> >
> > Geir,
> >
> > I'd like to summarize the discussion to put the summary to web-site. I'm
> > going to add something like: "We aimed to support wide range of
> different
> > platforms. The main criteria if platform is supported or not is that
> there
> > are people interesting in running test on regular base, reporting build
> > status, finding and fixing bugs for that platform. A list of currently
> > supported platforms can be found at
> > http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_VM_on. "
> >
> > BTW, I think we can also  use as indication if a platform is supported
> if
> > someone set up Harmony build-and-test infra on the platform and
> regularly
> > run it.
> >
> > Comments? Objections?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Stepan.
> >
> >
> > Windows
> > > ===
> > > Windows XP x86
> > >
> > > Linux
> > > =
> > > Ubuntu 6 x86
> > > Ubuntu 5 x86
> > > RHEL  (version ?) x86
> > > FC (version ?) x86
> > > SUSE (verion ?) x86
> > >
> >
>


--
Stepan Mishura
Intel Middleware Products Division

--
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Stepan Mishura]

On 10/25/06, Mikhail Loenko wrote:


does it make sense to put it on the site?




To put what? The definition of "supported platform" or/and the list of
supported platforms?

I think it makes sense to put at least the definition.

Thanks,
Stepan.

Thanks,

Mikhail

2006/10/25, Stepan Mishura
> On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> >
> > We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
> > community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we
as
> > a community commit to support.
> >
> > I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
> > community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
> > that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and
fix
> > bugs that specifically affect that platform"
> >
> > Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see
what's
> > popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating
what
> > you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
> > using a broad brush :
>
>
> Geir,
>
> I'd like to summarize the discussion to put the summary to web-site. I'm
> going to add something like: "We aimed to support wide range of
different
> platforms. The main criteria if platform is supported or not is that
there
> are people interesting in running test on regular base, reporting build
> status, finding and fixing bugs for that platform. A list of currently
> supported platforms can be found at
> http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_VM_on. "
>
> BTW, I think we can also  use as indication if a platform is supported
if
> someone set up Harmony build-and-test infra on the platform and
regularly
> run it.
>
> Comments? Objections?
>
> Thanks,
> Stepan.
>
>
> Windows
> > ===
> > Windows XP x86
> >
> > Linux
> > =
> > Ubuntu 6 x86
> > Ubuntu 5 x86
> > RHEL  (version ?) x86
> > FC (version ?) x86
> > SUSE (verion ?) x86
> >
>




--
Stepan Mishura
Intel Middleware Products Division

--
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

RE: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Konovalova, Svetlana]

>Do you think we can add a note with the revision number? This way, you
>at least know that the code of  revision worked ok/failed on this
>platform. Because such tests are done systematically, changing
revisions
>would not take much time to update.

+1 Good idea! :) 

Cheers,
Sveta

-Original Message-
From: Morozova, Nadezhda [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 1:04 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [general] POLL : supported platforms

My two cents...

> >I do not understand the lifecycle of this page. If I report today
that
> my
> >platform works OK, but the next commit brokes it, who will update the
> page?
>
> IMHO if the next commit breakes the work-ok-platform and if you notice
> it, why not to update the wiki page? Or you can let me know about this
> bug and I'll make the update:)
Do you think we can add a note with the revision number? This way, you
at least know that the code of  revision worked ok/failed on this
platform. Because such tests are done systematically, changing revisions
would not take much time to update. 

-Original Message-
From: Konovalova, Svetlana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 12:59 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [general] POLL : supported platforms


>Wow! the only platform with bugs we have is  "Windows XP with VS.NET
2005
>Community Edition" ! :)

 Well... are you sure? Or do you make this supposition judging by the
"Platforms to Run Harmony Development Kit on" page? The point is that I
didn't have enough info to fill in the empty table cells. My aim was to
create a field for developers' comments and the table there is right for
their convenience. :) I'd like to ask developers using different
platforms to leave their comments there to get the clear picture of what
we have for now. Does it make sense?

>I do not understand the lifecycle of this page. If I report today that
my
>platform works OK, but the next commit brokes it, who will update the
page?

IMHO if the next commit breakes the work-ok-platform and if you notice
it, why not to update the wiki page? Or you can let me know about this
bug and I'll make the update:) 



Cheers,
Sveta

-Original Message-
From: Mikhail Fursov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 12:11 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

On 10/25/06, Konovalova, Svetlana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Comments? Objections?


Wow! the only platform with bugs we have is  "Windows XP with VS.NET
2005
Community Edition" ! :)


I do not understand the lifecycle of this page. If I report today that
my
platform works OK, but the next commit brokes it, who will update the
page?
What is "works OK"? Builds and runs classlib/drlvm tests only?

Thanks,
> Stepan.
>
>
> Windows
> > ===
> > Windows XP x86
> >
> > Linux
> > =
> > Ubuntu 6 x86
> > Ubuntu 5 x86
> > RHEL  (version ?) x86
> > FC (version ?) x86
> > SUSE (verion ?) x86
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Stepan Mishura
> Intel Middleware Products Division
>
> --
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>



-- 
Mikhail Fursov

RE: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Morozova, Nadezhda]

My two cents...

> >I do not understand the lifecycle of this page. If I report today
that
> my
> >platform works OK, but the next commit brokes it, who will update the
> page?
>
> IMHO if the next commit breakes the work-ok-platform and if you notice
> it, why not to update the wiki page? Or you can let me know about this
> bug and I'll make the update:)
Do you think we can add a note with the revision number? This way, you
at least know that the code of  revision worked ok/failed on this
platform. Because such tests are done systematically, changing revisions
would not take much time to update. 

-Original Message-
From: Konovalova, Svetlana [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 12:59 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: RE: [general] POLL : supported platforms


>Wow! the only platform with bugs we have is  "Windows XP with VS.NET
2005
>Community Edition" ! :)

 Well... are you sure? Or do you make this supposition judging by the
"Platforms to Run Harmony Development Kit on" page? The point is that I
didn't have enough info to fill in the empty table cells. My aim was to
create a field for developers' comments and the table there is right for
their convenience. :) I'd like to ask developers using different
platforms to leave their comments there to get the clear picture of what
we have for now. Does it make sense?

>I do not understand the lifecycle of this page. If I report today that
my
>platform works OK, but the next commit brokes it, who will update the
page?

IMHO if the next commit breakes the work-ok-platform and if you notice
it, why not to update the wiki page? Or you can let me know about this
bug and I'll make the update:) 



Cheers,
Sveta

-Original Message-
From: Mikhail Fursov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 12:11 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

On 10/25/06, Konovalova, Svetlana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Comments? Objections?


Wow! the only platform with bugs we have is  "Windows XP with VS.NET
2005
Community Edition" ! :)


I do not understand the lifecycle of this page. If I report today that
my
platform works OK, but the next commit brokes it, who will update the
page?
What is "works OK"? Builds and runs classlib/drlvm tests only?

Thanks,
> Stepan.
>
>
> Windows
> > ===
> > Windows XP x86
> >
> > Linux
> > =
> > Ubuntu 6 x86
> > Ubuntu 5 x86
> > RHEL  (version ?) x86
> > FC (version ?) x86
> > SUSE (verion ?) x86
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Stepan Mishura
> Intel Middleware Products Division
>
> --
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>



-- 
Mikhail Fursov

RE: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Konovalova, Svetlana]

>Wow! the only platform with bugs we have is  "Windows XP with VS.NET
2005
>Community Edition" ! :)

 Well... are you sure? Or do you make this supposition judging by the
"Platforms to Run Harmony Development Kit on" page? The point is that I
didn't have enough info to fill in the empty table cells. My aim was to
create a field for developers' comments and the table there is right for
their convenience. :) I'd like to ask developers using different
platforms to leave their comments there to get the clear picture of what
we have for now. Does it make sense?

>I do not understand the lifecycle of this page. If I report today that
my
>platform works OK, but the next commit brokes it, who will update the
page?

IMHO if the next commit breakes the work-ok-platform and if you notice
it, why not to update the wiki page? Or you can let me know about this
bug and I'll make the update:) 


Cheers,
Sveta

-Original Message-
From: Mikhail Fursov [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 12:11 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

On 10/25/06, Konovalova, Svetlana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Comments? Objections?


Wow! the only platform with bugs we have is  "Windows XP with VS.NET
2005
Community Edition" ! :)


I do not understand the lifecycle of this page. If I report today that
my
platform works OK, but the next commit brokes it, who will update the
page?
What is "works OK"? Builds and runs classlib/drlvm tests only?

Thanks,
> Stepan.
>
>
> Windows
> > ===
> > Windows XP x86
> >
> > Linux
> > =
> > Ubuntu 6 x86
> > Ubuntu 5 x86
> > RHEL  (version ?) x86
> > FC (version ?) x86
> > SUSE (verion ?) x86
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Stepan Mishura
> Intel Middleware Products Division
>
> --
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>



-- 
Mikhail Fursov

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Mikhail Loenko]

does it make sense to put it on the site?

Thanks,
Mikhail

2006/10/25, Stepan Mishura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
> We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
> community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
> a community commit to support.
>
> I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
> community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
> that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
> bugs that specifically affect that platform"
>
> Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
> popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what
> you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
> using a broad brush :


Geir,

I'd like to summarize the discussion to put the summary to web-site. I'm
going to add something like: "We aimed to support wide range of different
platforms. The main criteria if platform is supported or not is that there
are people interesting in running test on regular base, reporting build
status, finding and fixing bugs for that platform. A list of currently
supported platforms can be found at
http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_VM_on. "

BTW, I think we can also  use as indication if a platform is supported if
someone set up Harmony build-and-test infra on the platform and regularly
run it.

Comments? Objections?

Thanks,
Stepan.


Windows
> ===
> Windows XP x86
>
> Linux
> =
> Ubuntu 6 x86
> Ubuntu 5 x86
> RHEL  (version ?) x86
> FC (version ?) x86
> SUSE (verion ?) x86
>
>
>


--
Stepan Mishura
Intel Middleware Products Division

--
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Mikhail Fursov]

On 10/25/06, Konovalova, Svetlana <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Comments? Objections?



Wow! the only platform with bugs we have is  "Windows XP with VS.NET 2005
Community Edition" ! :)

I do not understand the lifecycle of this page. If I report today that my
platform works OK, but the next commit brokes it, who will update the page?
What is "works OK"? Builds and runs classlib/drlvm tests only?

Thanks,

Stepan.


Windows
> ===
> Windows XP x86
>
> Linux
> =
> Ubuntu 6 x86
> Ubuntu 5 x86
> RHEL  (version ?) x86
> FC (version ?) x86
> SUSE (verion ?) x86
>
>
>


--
Stepan Mishura
Intel Middleware Products Division

--
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]





--
Mikhail Fursov

RE: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Konovalova, Svetlana]

Stepan, 

I support you idea, but IMHO the page you pointed out to is out-of-date.
I suggest using
http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_Harmony_Development_Kit_
on  as it seems to be much more suitable. I tried to support it adding
up-to-date info and posting the discussion issues. I'll be glad if you
find the aforementioned page useful :)  

Cheers,
Sveta

-Original Message-
From: Stepan Mishura [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 11:46 AM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
> We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
> community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we
as
> a community commit to support.
>
> I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
> community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
> that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and
fix
> bugs that specifically affect that platform"
>
> Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see
what's
> popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating
what
> you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
> using a broad brush :


Geir,

I'd like to summarize the discussion to put the summary to web-site. I'm
going to add something like: "We aimed to support wide range of
different
platforms. The main criteria if platform is supported or not is that
there
are people interesting in running test on regular base, reporting build
status, finding and fixing bugs for that platform. A list of currently
supported platforms can be found at
http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_VM_on. "

BTW, I think we can also  use as indication if a platform is supported
if
someone set up Harmony build-and-test infra on the platform and
regularly
run it.

Comments? Objections?

Thanks,
Stepan.


Windows
> ===
> Windows XP x86
>
> Linux
> =
> Ubuntu 6 x86
> Ubuntu 5 x86
> RHEL  (version ?) x86
> FC (version ?) x86
> SUSE (verion ?) x86
>
>
>


-- 
Stepan Mishura
Intel Middleware Products Division

--
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Stepan Mishura]

On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:


We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
a community commit to support.

I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
bugs that specifically affect that platform"

Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what
you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
using a broad brush :



Geir,

I'd like to summarize the discussion to put the summary to web-site. I'm
going to add something like: "We aimed to support wide range of different
platforms. The main criteria if platform is supported or not is that there
are people interesting in running test on regular base, reporting build
status, finding and fixing bugs for that platform. A list of currently
supported platforms can be found at
http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_VM_on. "

BTW, I think we can also  use as indication if a platform is supported if
someone set up Harmony build-and-test infra on the platform and regularly
run it.

Comments? Objections?

Thanks,
Stepan.


Windows

===
Windows XP x86

Linux
=
Ubuntu 6 x86
Ubuntu 5 x86
RHEL  (version ?) x86
FC (version ?) x86
SUSE (verion ?) x86






--
Stepan Mishura
Intel Middleware Products Division

--
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Mikhail Fursov]

Number of tests?

On 10/20/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


But what is the difference between "supported" and "in-progress" then?





--
Mikhail Fursov

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Mikhail Loenko]

But what is the difference between "supported" and "in-progress" then?

2006/10/20, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:



Mikhail Loenko wrote:
> Good! :)
>
> Now it's more or less clear about the categories that we have and I suggest
> that we discuss policies around the categories.
>
> Probably we will have weaker policies for the current stage of the
> project and
> stricter policies when we are closer to release.
>
> I suggest that we discuss current policies first.
>
> For the category "Yes" or "Supported" we do our best to not break it with
> commits. "Do our best" to be defined later. If a commit breaks that
> platform
> we stop further commits and either fix or roll it back ASAP. Comments?

Yes.

>
> For the category "In-progress" we should probably have weaker policies
> comparing to "Supported", but we still need some. Ideas?

Roll these back too.

> Possibly we should try not to break it and if we break then discuss
> whether it was intentionally or not and may decide to roll it back or
> do something
> else. Other ideas?
>
> Thanks,
> Mikhail
>
> 2006/10/19, Alex Blewitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> Even better:
>>
>> Yes
>> No
>> Maybe
>>
>> :-)
>>
>> On 18/10/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > Better :
>> >
>> > Supported
>> > Not-Supported
>> > In-Progress
>> >
>> >
>> > Mikhail Fursov wrote:
>> > > Mikhail,
>> > > I support your classification: it covers all types I can imagine.
>> > >
>> > > Here is my proposal of naming:
>> > > 1) "not supported"
>> > > 2) "product" or "supported"
>> > > 3) "incubation"
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > >>
>> > >> Well, I think there are at least three categories of platforms:
>> > >>
>> > >> 1) Platforms that we don't care about
>> > >> 2) Platforms that we think work and we want them working
>> > >> 3) Platforms that we want working but they still don't
>> > >>
>> > >> We definitely have to roll back the commits that break #2.
>> > >>
>> > >> We need some 'protection' policy to make it possible for platforms
>> > >> to graduate from #3 to #2
>> > >>
>> > >> And we need some criteria to define how #1 could become #3
>> > >>
>> > >> And we need names for the categories that are not misleading
>> > >>
>> > >> Comments?
>> > >>
>> > >> Thanks,
>> > >> Mikhail
>> > >>
>> > >> 2006/10/18, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> > >> >
>> > >> >
>> > >> > Mikhail Fursov wrote:
>> > >> > > Mikhail,
>> > >> > > The situation is possible with some Linux clones.
>> > >> > > And if we have such a situation I propose to take into
>> account if we
>> > >> have a
>> > >> > > commiter/volunteer to check this platform.
>> > >> > > If we have a volunteer  - we support it.
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > Another question is: what if volunteer is gone and no one
>> supports
>> > >> the
>> > >> > > platform? Will we claim that Harmony no longer supports the
>> platform?
>> > >> >
>> > >> > No - to be supported, we have to agree as a community.  I'm
>> wary about
>> > >> > there being one-person-supported platforms.
>> > >> >
>> > >> > We can easily have two categories -
>> > >> >
>> > >> > a) platforms that we certify as being compatible, and support
>> > >> >
>> > >> > b) platforms that we certify as being compatible, but don't
>> make any
>> > >> > support promises
>> > >> >
>> > >> > geir
>> > >> >
>> > >> > >
>> > >> > > On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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?
>> > >> > >>
>> > >> > >> Thanks,
>> > >> > >> Mikhail
>> > >> > >>
>> > >> > >>
>> > >> > >>
>> > >> > >> >
>> > >> > >> > geir
>> > >> > >> >
>> > >> > >> >
>> > >>
>> -
>> > >> > >> > Terms of use :
>> http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
>> > >> > >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > >> > >> > For additional commands, e-mail:
>>

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

Mikhail Loenko wrote:

Good! :)

Now it's more or less clear about the categories that we have and I suggest
that we discuss policies around the categories.

Probably we will have weaker policies for the current stage of the 
project and

stricter policies when we are closer to release.

I suggest that we discuss current policies first.

For the category "Yes" or "Supported" we do our best to not break it with
commits. "Do our best" to be defined later. If a commit breaks that 
platform

we stop further commits and either fix or roll it back ASAP. Comments?


Yes.



For the category "In-progress" we should probably have weaker policies
comparing to "Supported", but we still need some. Ideas?


Roll these back too.


Possibly we should try not to break it and if we break then discuss
whether it was intentionally or not and may decide to roll it back or
do something
else. Other ideas?

Thanks,
Mikhail

2006/10/19, Alex Blewitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

Even better:

Yes
No
Maybe

:-)

On 18/10/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Better :
>
> Supported
> Not-Supported
> In-Progress
>
>
> Mikhail Fursov wrote:
> > Mikhail,
> > I support your classification: it covers all types I can imagine.
> >
> > Here is my proposal of naming:
> > 1) "not supported"
> > 2) "product" or "supported"
> > 3) "incubation"
> >
> >
> > On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Well, I think there are at least three categories of platforms:
> >>
> >> 1) Platforms that we don't care about
> >> 2) Platforms that we think work and we want them working
> >> 3) Platforms that we want working but they still don't
> >>
> >> We definitely have to roll back the commits that break #2.
> >>
> >> We need some 'protection' policy to make it possible for platforms
> >> to graduate from #3 to #2
> >>
> >> And we need some criteria to define how #1 could become #3
> >>
> >> And we need names for the categories that are not misleading
> >>
> >> Comments?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Mikhail
> >>
> >> 2006/10/18, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Mikhail Fursov wrote:
> >> > > Mikhail,
> >> > > The situation is possible with some Linux clones.
> >> > > And if we have such a situation I propose to take into 
account if we

> >> have a
> >> > > commiter/volunteer to check this platform.
> >> > > If we have a volunteer  - we support it.
> >> > >
> >> > > Another question is: what if volunteer is gone and no one 
supports

> >> the
> >> > > platform? Will we claim that Harmony no longer supports the 
platform?

> >> >
> >> > No - to be supported, we have to agree as a community.  I'm 
wary about

> >> > there being one-person-supported platforms.
> >> >
> >> > We can easily have two categories -
> >> >
> >> > a) platforms that we certify as being compatible, and support
> >> >
> >> > b) platforms that we certify as being compatible, but don't 
make any

> >> > support promises
> >> >
> >> > geir
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > > On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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?
> >> > >>
> >> > >> 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 

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Egor Pasko]

On the 0x207 day of Apache Harmony Mikhail Loenko wrote:
> Good! :)
> 
> Now it's more or less clear about the categories that we have and I suggest
> that we discuss policies around the categories.
> 
> Probably we will have weaker policies for the current stage of the project and
> stricter policies when we are closer to release.
> 
> I suggest that we discuss current policies first.
> 
> For the category "Yes" or "Supported" we do our best to not break it with
> commits. "Do our best" to be defined later. If a commit breaks that platform
> we stop further commits and either fix or roll it back ASAP. Comments?
> 
> For the category "In-progress" we should probably have weaker policies
> comparing to "Supported", but we still need some. Ideas?
> Possibly we should try not to break it and if we break then discuss
> whether it was intentionally or not and may decide to roll it back or
> do something
> else. Other ideas?

Yes, I am thinking about the same. And in terms of "Yes" there should
be not a large number of platforms (freesing commits is expensive).

In this way, "In-Progress" does not seem very good. Because the
"progress" never ends. I propose "fast support" and "slow support".

"Yes" == "Supported" == "critical-to-repair platform set" should be
kept small enough. I would vote for <7 for today. We can have more as
community grows. I performed no scientific estimations for the number,
of course:)

> Thanks,
> Mikhail
> 
> 2006/10/19, Alex Blewitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > Even better:
> >
> > Yes
> > No
> > Maybe
> >
> > :-)
> >
> > On 18/10/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > Better :
> > >
> > > Supported
> > > Not-Supported
> > > In-Progress
> > >
> > >
> > > Mikhail Fursov wrote:
> > > > Mikhail,
> > > > I support your classification: it covers all types I can imagine.
> > > >
> > > > Here is my proposal of naming:
> > > > 1) "not supported"
> > > > 2) "product" or "supported"
> > > > 3) "incubation"
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Well, I think there are at least three categories of platforms:
> > > >>
> > > >> 1) Platforms that we don't care about
> > > >> 2) Platforms that we think work and we want them working
> > > >> 3) Platforms that we want working but they still don't
> > > >>
> > > >> We definitely have to roll back the commits that break #2.
> > > >>
> > > >> We need some 'protection' policy to make it possible for platforms
> > > >> to graduate from #3 to #2
> > > >>
> > > >> And we need some criteria to define how #1 could become #3
> > > >>
> > > >> And we need names for the categories that are not misleading
> > > >>
> > > >> Comments?
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >> Mikhail
> > > >>
> > > >> 2006/10/18, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Mikhail Fursov wrote:
> > > >> > > Mikhail,
> > > >> > > The situation is possible with some Linux clones.
> > > >> > > And if we have such a situation I propose to take into account if 
> > > >> > > we
> > > >> have a
> > > >> > > commiter/volunteer to check this platform.
> > > >> > > If we have a volunteer  - we support it.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Another question is: what if volunteer is gone and no one supports
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > platform? Will we claim that Harmony no longer supports the 
> > > >> > > platform?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > No - to be supported, we have to agree as a community.  I'm wary 
> > > >> > about
> > > >> > there being one-person-supported platforms.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > We can easily have two categories -
> > > >> >
> > > >> > a) platforms that we certify as being compatible, and support
> > > >> >
> > > >> > b) platforms that we certify as being compatible, but don't make any
> > > >> > support promises
> > > >> >
> > > >> > geir
> > > >> >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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

Re: Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Mikhail Loenko]

Good! :)

Now it's more or less clear about the categories that we have and I suggest
that we discuss policies around the categories.

Probably we will have weaker policies for the current stage of the project and
stricter policies when we are closer to release.

I suggest that we discuss current policies first.

For the category "Yes" or "Supported" we do our best to not break it with
commits. "Do our best" to be defined later. If a commit breaks that platform
we stop further commits and either fix or roll it back ASAP. Comments?

For the category "In-progress" we should probably have weaker policies
comparing to "Supported", but we still need some. Ideas?
Possibly we should try not to break it and if we break then discuss
whether it was intentionally or not and may decide to roll it back or
do something
else. Other ideas?

Thanks,
Mikhail

2006/10/19, Alex Blewitt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:

Even better:

Yes
No
Maybe

:-)

On 18/10/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Better :
>
> Supported
> Not-Supported
> In-Progress
>
>
> Mikhail Fursov wrote:
> > Mikhail,
> > I support your classification: it covers all types I can imagine.
> >
> > Here is my proposal of naming:
> > 1) "not supported"
> > 2) "product" or "supported"
> > 3) "incubation"
> >
> >
> > On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> Well, I think there are at least three categories of platforms:
> >>
> >> 1) Platforms that we don't care about
> >> 2) Platforms that we think work and we want them working
> >> 3) Platforms that we want working but they still don't
> >>
> >> We definitely have to roll back the commits that break #2.
> >>
> >> We need some 'protection' policy to make it possible for platforms
> >> to graduate from #3 to #2
> >>
> >> And we need some criteria to define how #1 could become #3
> >>
> >> And we need names for the categories that are not misleading
> >>
> >> Comments?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Mikhail
> >>
> >> 2006/10/18, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Mikhail Fursov wrote:
> >> > > Mikhail,
> >> > > The situation is possible with some Linux clones.
> >> > > And if we have such a situation I propose to take into account if we
> >> have a
> >> > > commiter/volunteer to check this platform.
> >> > > If we have a volunteer  - we support it.
> >> > >
> >> > > Another question is: what if volunteer is gone and no one supports
> >> the
> >> > > platform? Will we claim that Harmony no longer supports the platform?
> >> >
> >> > No - to be supported, we have to agree as a community.  I'm wary about
> >> > there being one-person-supported platforms.
> >> >
> >> > We can easily have two categories -
> >> >
> >> > a) platforms that we certify as being compatible, and support
> >> >
> >> > b) platforms that we certify as being compatible, but don't make any
> >> > support promises
> >> >
> >> > geir
> >> >
> >> > >
> >> > > On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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?
> >> > >>
> >> > >> 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 PROTEC

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Egor Pasko]

On the 0x206 day of Apache Harmony Mikhail Fursov wrote:
> On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > And we need some criteria to define how #1 could become #3
> 
> 
> Healthy community?
> + Do we need some criteria to define how #3 could become #1 ?

why not? what is so unhealthy in throwing some garbage away? :)

Seriously, criteria for supporting could be something like: "if there
is always someone working to repair that platform when it is broken,
we support it, otherwise we cannot afford that platform". That's a
kind of "slow support".

I'd also suggest to find a small set of "fast support" platforms,
fixing them is first priority for all of us. It makes a guaranteed
build/run/tests at (almost) each moment in time.

Does it make sense?

-- 
Egor Pasko, Intel Managed Runtime Division


-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Alex Blewitt]

Even better:

Yes
No
Maybe

:-)

On 18/10/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Better :

Supported
Not-Supported
In-Progress


Mikhail Fursov wrote:
> Mikhail,
> I support your classification: it covers all types I can imagine.
>
> Here is my proposal of naming:
> 1) "not supported"
> 2) "product" or "supported"
> 3) "incubation"
>
>
> On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Well, I think there are at least three categories of platforms:
>>
>> 1) Platforms that we don't care about
>> 2) Platforms that we think work and we want them working
>> 3) Platforms that we want working but they still don't
>>
>> We definitely have to roll back the commits that break #2.
>>
>> We need some 'protection' policy to make it possible for platforms
>> to graduate from #3 to #2
>>
>> And we need some criteria to define how #1 could become #3
>>
>> And we need names for the categories that are not misleading
>>
>> Comments?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Mikhail
>>
>> 2006/10/18, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>> >
>> >
>> > Mikhail Fursov wrote:
>> > > Mikhail,
>> > > The situation is possible with some Linux clones.
>> > > And if we have such a situation I propose to take into account if we
>> have a
>> > > commiter/volunteer to check this platform.
>> > > If we have a volunteer  - we support it.
>> > >
>> > > Another question is: what if volunteer is gone and no one supports
>> the
>> > > platform? Will we claim that Harmony no longer supports the platform?
>> >
>> > No - to be supported, we have to agree as a community.  I'm wary about
>> > there being one-person-supported platforms.
>> >
>> > We can easily have two categories -
>> >
>> > a) platforms that we certify as being compatible, and support
>> >
>> > b) platforms that we certify as being compatible, but don't make any
>> > support promises
>> >
>> > geir
>> >
>> > >
>> > > On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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?
>> > >>
>> > >> 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]
>> >
>> >
>>
>> -
>> 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]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

Better :

Supported
Not-Supported
In-Progress


Mikhail Fursov wrote:

Mikhail,
I support your classification: it covers all types I can imagine.

Here is my proposal of naming:
1) "not supported"
2) "product" or "supported"
3) "incubation"


On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Well, I think there are at least three categories of platforms:

1) Platforms that we don't care about
2) Platforms that we think work and we want them working
3) Platforms that we want working but they still don't

We definitely have to roll back the commits that break #2.

We need some 'protection' policy to make it possible for platforms
to graduate from #3 to #2

And we need some criteria to define how #1 could become #3

And we need names for the categories that are not misleading

Comments?

Thanks,
Mikhail

2006/10/18, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
> Mikhail Fursov wrote:
> > Mikhail,
> > The situation is possible with some Linux clones.
> > And if we have such a situation I propose to take into account if we
have a
> > commiter/volunteer to check this platform.
> > If we have a volunteer  - we support it.
> >
> > Another question is: what if volunteer is gone and no one supports 
the

> > platform? Will we claim that Harmony no longer supports the platform?
>
> No - to be supported, we have to agree as a community.  I'm wary about
> there being one-person-supported platforms.
>
> We can easily have two categories -
>
> a) platforms that we certify as being compatible, and support
>
> b) platforms that we certify as being compatible, but don't make any
> support promises
>
> geir
>
> >
> > On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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?
> >>
> >> 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]
>
>

-
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]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Mikhail Fursov]

On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


And we need some criteria to define how #1 could become #3



Healthy community?
+ Do we need some criteria to define how #3 could become #1 ?

--
Mikhail Fursov

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Mikhail Fursov]

Mikhail,
I support your classification: it covers all types I can imagine.

Here is my proposal of naming:
1) "not supported"
2) "product" or "supported"
3) "incubation"


On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Well, I think there are at least three categories of platforms:

1) Platforms that we don't care about
2) Platforms that we think work and we want them working
3) Platforms that we want working but they still don't

We definitely have to roll back the commits that break #2.

We need some 'protection' policy to make it possible for platforms
to graduate from #3 to #2

And we need some criteria to define how #1 could become #3

And we need names for the categories that are not misleading

Comments?

Thanks,
Mikhail

2006/10/18, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
>
>
> Mikhail Fursov wrote:
> > Mikhail,
> > The situation is possible with some Linux clones.
> > And if we have such a situation I propose to take into account if we
have a
> > commiter/volunteer to check this platform.
> > If we have a volunteer  - we support it.
> >
> > Another question is: what if volunteer is gone and no one supports the
> > platform? Will we claim that Harmony no longer supports the platform?
>
> No - to be supported, we have to agree as a community.  I'm wary about
> there being one-person-supported platforms.
>
> We can easily have two categories -
>
> a) platforms that we certify as being compatible, and support
>
> b) platforms that we certify as being compatible, but don't make any
> support promises
>
> geir
>
> >
> > On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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?
> >>
> >> 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]
>
>

-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]





--
Mikhail Fursov

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Mikhail Loenko]

Well, I think there are at least three categories of platforms:

1) Platforms that we don't care about
2) Platforms that we think work and we want them working
3) Platforms that we want working but they still don't

We definitely have to roll back the commits that break #2.

We need some 'protection' policy to make it possible for platforms
to graduate from #3 to #2

And we need some criteria to define how #1 could become #3

And we need names for the categories that are not misleading

Comments?

Thanks,
Mikhail

2006/10/18, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:



Mikhail Fursov wrote:
> Mikhail,
> The situation is possible with some Linux clones.
> And if we have such a situation I propose to take into account if we have a
> commiter/volunteer to check this platform.
> If we have a volunteer  - we support it.
>
> Another question is: what if volunteer is gone and no one supports the
> platform? Will we claim that Harmony no longer supports the platform?

No - to be supported, we have to agree as a community.  I'm wary about
there being one-person-supported platforms.

We can easily have two categories -

a) platforms that we certify as being compatible, and support

b) platforms that we certify as being compatible, but don't make any
support promises

geir

>
> On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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?
>>
>> 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]




-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Alexei Zakharov]

b) platforms that we certify as being compatible, but don't make any
support promises


Well, I can periodically run tests on and report issues for Windows
2000. I think it fits this your (b) category.

Regards,

2006/10/18, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:


Mikhail Fursov wrote:
> Mikhail,
> The situation is possible with some Linux clones.
> And if we have such a situation I propose to take into account if we have a
> commiter/volunteer to check this platform.
> If we have a volunteer  - we support it.
>
> Another question is: what if volunteer is gone and no one supports the
> platform? Will we claim that Harmony no longer supports the platform?

No - to be supported, we have to agree as a community.  I'm wary about
there being one-person-supported platforms.

We can easily have two categories -

a) platforms that we certify as being compatible, and support

b) platforms that we certify as being compatible, but don't make any
support promises

geir

>
> On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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?


--
Alexei Zakharov,
Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division, Russia

-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

don't dismiss the value of this discussion :)

Konovalova, Svetlana wrote:

Folks,

AFAIS, a simple vote arranged by Geir led to long discussion. :)
To collect your votes and ideas/suggestions in an effective way, I
created a wiki page
"Platforms to Run Harmony Development Kit on" [1]. Please have a look
when you find a chance. 
Feel free to add your comments right there. I'll be glad if you find it

useful.

[1]
http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_Harmony_Development_Kit_
on 


Best regards,
Sveta Konovalova

-Original Message-
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 7:27 PM

To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms



Konovalova, Svetlana wrote:

Gier,

An idea came to my mind how to collect votes in an effective way. 
Taking into consideration the information from the "[general] POLL :

supported platforms" mailing list, I've just created a wiki page
"Platforms to Run Harmony Development Kit on" [1] to define
"sure-to-work" configurations. Everyone can share his/her experience
there adding comments whether this or that platform works or not and
how: stable, or unstable, or buggy etc. 
What's your opinion about it?




I certainly think that it's a good idea, but I started a thread on 
purpose so we can discuss things.  As you see, it led to good 
discussion, rather than just a set of votes.


If you'd like to summarize the thread there, that would be a great help.

geir


[1]


http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_Harmony_Development_Kit_
on 


Cheers,
Sveta Konovalova

-Original Message-
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 7:58 PM

To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [general] POLL : supported platforms

We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in 
community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we
as 

a community commit to support.

I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the 
community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users 
that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and
fix 

bugs that specifically affect that platform"

Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see
what's 

popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating

what
you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start, 
using a broad brush :



Windows
===
Windows XP x86

Linux
=
Ubuntu 6 x86
Ubuntu 5 x86
RHEL  (version ?) x86
FC (version ?) x86
SUSE (verion ?) x86

-
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]

-
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]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

Mikhail Fursov wrote:

Mikhail,
The situation is possible with some Linux clones.
And if we have such a situation I propose to take into account if we have a
commiter/volunteer to check this platform.
If we have a volunteer  - we support it.

Another question is: what if volunteer is gone and no one supports the
platform? Will we claim that Harmony no longer supports the platform?


No - to be supported, we have to agree as a community.  I'm wary about 
there being one-person-supported platforms.


We can easily have two categories -

a) platforms that we certify as being compatible, and support

b) platforms that we certify as being compatible, but don't make any 
support promises


geir



On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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?

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]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

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]

RE: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Konovalova, Svetlana]

Folks,

AFAIS, a simple vote arranged by Geir led to long discussion. :)
To collect your votes and ideas/suggestions in an effective way, I
created a wiki page
"Platforms to Run Harmony Development Kit on" [1]. Please have a look
when you find a chance. 
Feel free to add your comments right there. I'll be glad if you find it
useful.

[1]
http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_Harmony_Development_Kit_
on 

Best regards,
Sveta Konovalova

-Original Message-
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 7:27 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms



Konovalova, Svetlana wrote:
> 
> Gier,
> 
> An idea came to my mind how to collect votes in an effective way. 
> Taking into consideration the information from the "[general] POLL :
> supported platforms" mailing list, I've just created a wiki page
> "Platforms to Run Harmony Development Kit on" [1] to define
> "sure-to-work" configurations. Everyone can share his/her experience
> there adding comments whether this or that platform works or not and
> how: stable, or unstable, or buggy etc. 
> What's your opinion about it?
> 

I certainly think that it's a good idea, but I started a thread on 
purpose so we can discuss things.  As you see, it led to good 
discussion, rather than just a set of votes.

If you'd like to summarize the thread there, that would be a great help.

geir

> [1]
>
http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_Harmony_Development_Kit_
> on 
> 
> Cheers,
> Sveta Konovalova
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 7:58 PM
> To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [general] POLL : supported platforms
> 
> We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in 
> community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we
as 
> a community commit to support.
> 
> I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the 
> community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users 
> that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and
fix 
> bugs that specifically affect that platform"
> 
> Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see
what's 
> popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating
what
> 
> you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start, 
> using a broad brush :
> 
> 
> Windows
> ===
> Windows XP x86
> 
> Linux
> =
> Ubuntu 6 x86
> Ubuntu 5 x86
> RHEL  (version ?) x86
> FC (version ?) x86
> SUSE (verion ?) x86
> 
> -
> 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]

-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Egor Pasko]

On the 0x206 day of Apache Harmony Mikhail Fursov wrote:
> Mikhail,
> The situation is possible with some Linux clones.
> And if we have such a situation I propose to take into account if we have a
> commiter/volunteer to check this platform.
> If we have a volunteer  - we support it.
> 
> Another question is: what if volunteer is gone and no one supports the
> platform? Will we claim that Harmony no longer supports the platform?

BTW, I do not like the term "support". It is too overloaded)

General recipe: if somebody needs a platform which has Harmony broken,
we fix it. We have priorities to fix. And we are now preparing the
"critical platforms list", which should be *small enough* (<7),
because it would be top-priority to fix them. In this case only a lot
of volunteers gone can uncover the situation like you describe.

If we want a *large enough* list with "all good platforms we want to
work on", let's make the list just before each release. Until then,
we can "support" (i.e. fix the code) based on as-needed and priority
considerations. It would be much easier and would not require us to
maintain lists of platforms here and there.

> On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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?
> >
> > 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]
> >
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Mikhail Fursov

-- 
Egor Pasko, Intel Managed Runtime Division


-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Mikhail Fursov]

Mikhail,
The situation is possible with some Linux clones.
And if we have such a situation I propose to take into account if we have a
commiter/volunteer to check this platform.
If we have a volunteer  - we support it.

Another question is: what if volunteer is gone and no one supports the
platform? Will we claim that Harmony no longer supports the platform?

On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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?

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]





--
Mikhail Fursov

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Mikhail Loenko]

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?

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]

RE: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Konovalova, Svetlana]

>If you'd like to summarize the thread there, that would be a great
help.

Sure! I'll try to summarize the discussion issues there.

Cheers,
Sveta

-Original Message-
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Tuesday, October 17, 2006 7:27 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms



Konovalova, Svetlana wrote:
> 
> Gier,
> 
> An idea came to my mind how to collect votes in an effective way. 
> Taking into consideration the information from the "[general] POLL :
> supported platforms" mailing list, I've just created a wiki page
> "Platforms to Run Harmony Development Kit on" [1] to define
> "sure-to-work" configurations. Everyone can share his/her experience
> there adding comments whether this or that platform works or not and
> how: stable, or unstable, or buggy etc. 
> What's your opinion about it?
> 

I certainly think that it's a good idea, but I started a thread on 
purpose so we can discuss things.  As you see, it led to good 
discussion, rather than just a set of votes.

If you'd like to summarize the thread there, that would be a great help.

geir

> [1]
>
http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_Harmony_Development_Kit_
> on 
> 
> Cheers,
> Sveta Konovalova
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
> Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 7:58 PM
> To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: [general] POLL : supported platforms
> 
> We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in 
> community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we
as 
> a community commit to support.
> 
> I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the 
> community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users 
> that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and
fix 
> bugs that specifically affect that platform"
> 
> Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see
what's 
> popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating
what
> 
> you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start, 
> using a broad brush :
> 
> 
> Windows
> ===
> Windows XP x86
> 
> Linux
> =
> Ubuntu 6 x86
> Ubuntu 5 x86
> RHEL  (version ?) x86
> FC (version ?) x86
> SUSE (verion ?) x86
> 
> -
> 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]

-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

Konovalova, Svetlana wrote:


Gier,

An idea came to my mind how to collect votes in an effective way. 
Taking into consideration the information from the "[general] POLL :

supported platforms" mailing list, I've just created a wiki page
"Platforms to Run Harmony Development Kit on" [1] to define
"sure-to-work" configurations. Everyone can share his/her experience
there adding comments whether this or that platform works or not and
how: stable, or unstable, or buggy etc. 
What's your opinion about it?




I certainly think that it's a good idea, but I started a thread on 
purpose so we can discuss things.  As you see, it led to good 
discussion, rather than just a set of votes.


If you'd like to summarize the thread there, that would be a great help.

geir


[1]
http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_Harmony_Development_Kit_
on 


Cheers,
Sveta Konovalova

-Original Message-
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 7:58 PM

To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [general] POLL : supported platforms

We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in 
community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as 
a community commit to support.


I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the 
community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users 
that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix 
bugs that specifically affect that platform"


Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's 
popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what


you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start, 
using a broad brush :



Windows
===
Windows XP x86

Linux
=
Ubuntu 6 x86
Ubuntu 5 x86
RHEL  (version ?) x86
FC (version ?) x86
SUSE (verion ?) x86

-
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]

RE: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Konovalova, Svetlana]

Gier,

An idea came to my mind how to collect votes in an effective way. 
Taking into consideration the information from the "[general] POLL :
supported platforms" mailing list, I've just created a wiki page
"Platforms to Run Harmony Development Kit on" [1] to define
"sure-to-work" configurations. Everyone can share his/her experience
there adding comments whether this or that platform works or not and
how: stable, or unstable, or buggy etc. 
What's your opinion about it?

[1]
http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_Harmony_Development_Kit_
on 

Cheers,
Sveta Konovalova

-Original Message-
From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
Sent: Monday, October 16, 2006 7:58 PM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: [general] POLL : supported platforms

We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in 
community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as 
a community commit to support.

I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the 
community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users 
that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix 
bugs that specifically affect that platform"

Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's 
popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what

you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start, 
using a broad brush :


Windows
===
Windows XP x86

Linux
=
Ubuntu 6 x86
Ubuntu 5 x86
RHEL  (version ?) x86
FC (version ?) x86
SUSE (verion ?) x86

-
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]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Mikhail Fursov]

On 10/17/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



Lets define support as passing >90% of classlib unit and
smoke/c-unit/kernel in DRLVM



I'm OK with it.
If we define it in this way there is no need to poll. If the platform runs
the tests one day it automatically becomes 'officially supported'.


--
Mikhail Fursov

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

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


geir

-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

I'm typing this on a i686 OS X box :)

Mikhail Fursov wrote:

On 10/17/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



> 2) Do we need to add to the 'officially supported' list platforms that
are
> unable to run HelloWorld app?

I don't understand - how would it be supported if it didn't work?

Neither do I. But I see in the list OsX, IPF...




-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Mikhail Loenko]

2006/10/17, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:



Mikhail Fursov wrote:
> On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> Great!  Write that down with your votes.  (Note, I was just kicking this
>> off, not being comprehensive...)
>>
>
> OK,  I'll try to add more restrictions to the list.
>
> 1) DRLVM JIT has a limitation today: we can run only on PC with SSE/SSE2
> support.
> This can be an advanced task for JIT gurus to add x87 support, but before
> that we can't claim that we officially support hardware without SSE2.
>
> 2) Do we need to add to the 'officially supported' list platforms that are
> unable to run HelloWorld app?

I don't understand - how would it be supported if it didn't work?


What do you mean by "work"? Runs hello world app?
At the point we decide to support a new
platform it's unlikely that the new platform "works".

But if we don't support a platform then we doubtfully will be able to make
it running even hello, because each our commit could make the code for
that unsupported platform worse and worse.

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"

Thanks,
Mikhail




 > Maybe we can give another name to the list of
> such platforms and move a platform into the 'officially supported' list
> only
> when it runs simple apps?
>

-
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]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Mikhail Fursov]

On 10/17/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



> 2) Do we need to add to the 'officially supported' list platforms that
are
> unable to run HelloWorld app?

I don't understand - how would it be supported if it didn't work?

Neither do I. But I see in the list OsX, IPF...


--
Mikhail Fursov

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

Mikhail Fursov wrote:

On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Great!  Write that down with your votes.  (Note, I was just kicking this
off, not being comprehensive...)



OK,  I'll try to add more restrictions to the list.

1) DRLVM JIT has a limitation today: we can run only on PC with SSE/SSE2
support.
This can be an advanced task for JIT gurus to add x87 support, but before
that we can't claim that we officially support hardware without SSE2.

2) Do we need to add to the 'officially supported' list platforms that are
unable to run HelloWorld app? 


I don't understand - how would it be supported if it didn't work?

> Maybe we can give another name to the list of
such platforms and move a platform into the 'officially supported' list 
only

when it runs simple apps?



-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Mikhail Fursov]

On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


Great!  Write that down with your votes.  (Note, I was just kicking this
off, not being comprehensive...)



OK,  I'll try to add more restrictions to the list.

1) DRLVM JIT has a limitation today: we can run only on PC with SSE/SSE2
support.
This can be an advanced task for JIT gurus to add x87 support, but before
that we can't claim that we officially support hardware without SSE2.

2) Do we need to add to the 'officially supported' list platforms that are
unable to run HelloWorld app? Maybe we can give another name to the list of
such platforms and move a platform into the 'officially supported' list only
when it runs simple apps?

--
Mikhail Fursov

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Egor Pasko]

What a flame! :)

I am afraid of "supporting" Gentoo, it's so diverse inside :)

For now, my vote would go to:
Linux(Ubuntu/Debian/SUSE/FC)/i686/x86_64/gcc-4.1 (all combinations)
(to be changed in future)

and, yes, windoze..

On the 0x205 day of Apache Harmony Gregory Shimansky wrote:
> I have Gentoo with gcc 4.1.1 on x86 and x86_64 and I have Windows XP and 
> Windows 2003 server on x86.
> 
> I also have Windows XP with VS.NET 2005 Community Edition but so far 
> experimenting with 100% free toolchaing on windows shows that it requires a 
> lot of effort to make even classlib work with IBM VME (last time I did it was 
> several months ago so I cannot give a current status),  not to mention 
> compiling drlvm on it. It is because of Microsoft secure API initiative, DLL 
> manifests and stuff like that in VS.NET 2005. This is probably a subject for 
> a separate discussion.
> 
> On Monday 16 October 2006 19:57 Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> > We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
> > community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
> > a community commit to support.
> >
> > I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
> > community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
> > that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
> > bugs that specifically affect that platform"
> >
> > Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
> > popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what
> > you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
> > using a broad brush :
> >
> >
> > Windows
> > ===
> > Windows XP x86
> >
> > Linux
> > =
> > Ubuntu 6 x86
> > Ubuntu 5 x86
> > RHEL  (version ?) x86
> > FC (version ?) x86
> > SUSE (verion ?) x86
> 
> -- 
> Gregory Shimansky, Intel Middleware Products Division
> 
> -
> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> 

-- 
Egor Pasko, Intel Managed Runtime Division


-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Pavel Ozhdikhin]

1. Windows XP x86, Windows Server 2003 x86 (32bit)
2. Linux SLES 9 32bit
3. Linux SUSE 9 64bit
3. Linux SLES 9 IPF

Thank you,
Pavel

On 10/17/06, Xiao-Feng Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

My vote:

FC4/5,  Suse11, Windows XP/2003
X86 (both 32bit and 64bit), and IPF

I guess it's a bit unclear to say IA64 in the community. It would be
clearer to use "X86 64bit" or "IPF (Itanium)".

Thanks,
xiaofeng

On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
> community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
> a community commit to support.
>
> I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
> community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
> that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
> bugs that specifically affect that platform"
>
> Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
> popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what
> you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
> using a broad brush :
>
>
> Windows
> ===
> Windows XP x86
>
> Linux
> =
> Ubuntu 6 x86
> Ubuntu 5 x86
> RHEL  (version ?) x86
> FC (version ?) x86
> SUSE (verion ?) x86
>
> -
> 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]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Xiao-Feng Li]

My vote:

FC4/5,  Suse11, Windows XP/2003
X86 (both 32bit and 64bit), and IPF

I guess it's a bit unclear to say IA64 in the community. It would be
clearer to use "X86 64bit" or "IPF (Itanium)".

Thanks,
xiaofeng

On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
a community commit to support.

I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
bugs that specifically affect that platform"

Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what
you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
using a broad brush :


Windows
===
Windows XP x86

Linux
=
Ubuntu 6 x86
Ubuntu 5 x86
RHEL  (version ?) x86
FC (version ?) x86
SUSE (verion ?) x86

-
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]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Rana Dasgupta]

On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

>
> We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
> community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
> a community commit to support.
>
> I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
> community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
> that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
> bugs that specifically affect that platform"
>
> Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
> popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what
> you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
> using a broad brush :
>
>
> Windows
> ===
> Windows XP x86
>
> Linux
> =
> Ubuntu 6 x86
> Ubuntu 5 x86
> RHEL  (version ?) x86
> FC (version ?) x86
> SUSE (verion ?) x86



My RHEL version is 2.6.9. I have a SUSE version 11. On Windows, I would
suggest both XP and Windows Server 2003. Toolchains are a somewhat othogonal
topic, I think.

As Mikhail points out, we may want to clarify the minimum machine model (
Pentium III in x86 case ). I think we also de facto decided to support EM64T
and IPF on Linux  on other threads.

When Vista is out, we should support it both on 32 and 64 bit.

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Gregory Shimansky]

I have Gentoo with gcc 4.1.1 on x86 and x86_64 and I have Windows XP and 
Windows 2003 server on x86.

I also have Windows XP with VS.NET 2005 Community Edition but so far 
experimenting with 100% free toolchaing on windows shows that it requires a 
lot of effort to make even classlib work with IBM VME (last time I did it was 
several months ago so I cannot give a current status),  not to mention 
compiling drlvm on it. It is because of Microsoft secure API initiative, DLL 
manifests and stuff like that in VS.NET 2005. This is probably a subject for 
a separate discussion.

On Monday 16 October 2006 19:57 Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
> community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
> a community commit to support.
>
> I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
> community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
> that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
> bugs that specifically affect that platform"
>
> Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
> popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what
> you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
> using a broad brush :
>
>
> Windows
> ===
> Windows XP x86
>
> Linux
> =
> Ubuntu 6 x86
> Ubuntu 5 x86
> RHEL  (version ?) x86
> FC (version ?) x86
> SUSE (verion ?) x86

-- 
Gregory Shimansky, Intel Middleware Products Division

-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:


It's a wishlist - we support what people want.  Since we don't formally
support anything...

(to that end, I want OS X PPC and OS X x86 on my wishlist)


right, that's exactly what I was thinking:

 macosx 10.4 - PowerPC
 macosx 10.4 - x86

btw, has anybody started working on porting harmony over to macosx at
least on intel chips?


I took a run at it when I first got my MacBook Pro.  On my long, long list.



It might well be that by the time we get there, pretty much nobody would
care about powerpc anymore anyway.


The IBM people might... there's that whole "Power Architecture" thingy 
of theirs :)


geir





-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Stefano Mazzocchi]

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> 
> 
> Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
>> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>> We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
>>> community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
>>> a community commit to support.
>>>
>>> I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
>>> community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
>>> that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
>>> bugs that specifically affect that platform"
>>>
>>> Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
>>> popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what
>>> you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
>>> using a broad brush :
>>>
>>>
>>> Windows
>>> ===
>>> Windows XP x86
>>>
>>> Linux
>>> =
>>> Ubuntu 6 x86
>>> Ubuntu 5 x86
>>> RHEL  (version ?) x86
>>> FC (version ?) x86
>>> SUSE (verion ?) x86
>>
>> is this for "platforms we currently support" or for "platforms that we
>> aim to support"?
> 
> Yes :)
> 
> It's a wishlist - we support what people want.  Since we don't formally
> support anything...
> 
> (to that end, I want OS X PPC and OS X x86 on my wishlist)

right, that's exactly what I was thinking:

 macosx 10.4 - PowerPC
 macosx 10.4 - x86

btw, has anybody started working on porting harmony over to macosx at
least on intel chips?

It might well be that by the time we get there, pretty much nobody would
care about powerpc anymore anyway.

-- 
Stefano.


-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Mike Ringrose]

Ubuntu 6 x86, Debian 3.1 x86, Mac OSX ia32 and ia64 (as I will be upgrading
in a few months).

Mike Ringrose

On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:




Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>> We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
>> community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
>> a community commit to support.
>>
>> I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
>> community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
>> that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
>> bugs that specifically affect that platform"
>>
>> Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
>> popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating
what
>> you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
>> using a broad brush :
>>
>>
>> Windows
>> ===
>> Windows XP x86
>>
>> Linux
>> =
>> Ubuntu 6 x86
>> Ubuntu 5 x86
>> RHEL  (version ?) x86
>> FC (version ?) x86
>> SUSE (verion ?) x86
>
> is this for "platforms we currently support" or for "platforms that we
> aim to support"?

Yes :)

It's a wishlist - we support what people want.  Since we don't formally
support anything...

(to that end, I want OS X PPC and OS X x86 on my wishlist)

geir

>

-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:

We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
a community commit to support.

I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
bugs that specifically affect that platform"

Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what
you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
using a broad brush :


Windows
===
Windows XP x86

Linux
=
Ubuntu 6 x86
Ubuntu 5 x86
RHEL  (version ?) x86
FC (version ?) x86
SUSE (verion ?) x86


is this for "platforms we currently support" or for "platforms that we
aim to support"?


Yes :)

It's a wishlist - we support what people want.  Since we don't formally 
support anything...


(to that end, I want OS X PPC and OS X x86 on my wishlist)

geir





-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Stefano Mazzocchi]

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
> We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
> community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
> a community commit to support.
> 
> I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
> community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
> that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
> bugs that specifically affect that platform"
> 
> Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
> popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what
> you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
> using a broad brush :
> 
> 
> Windows
> ===
> Windows XP x86
> 
> Linux
> =
> Ubuntu 6 x86
> Ubuntu 5 x86
> RHEL  (version ?) x86
> FC (version ?) x86
> SUSE (verion ?) x86

is this for "platforms we currently support" or for "platforms that we
aim to support"?

-- 
Stefano.


-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Nathan Beyer]

My primary votes would go for -
Windows XP, Server 2003, Vista on ia32 and ia64 platforms

Secondary votes -
Ubuntu, RHEL/FC, SUSE on ia32 and ia64 platforms

Tertiary votes -
MacOSX, ia32 and ia64 platforms - this would give me a reason to buy a
MacBook Pro :)

-Nathan

On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
a community commit to support.

I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
bugs that specifically affect that platform"

Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what
you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
using a broad brush :


Windows
===
Windows XP x86

Linux
=
Ubuntu 6 x86
Ubuntu 5 x86
RHEL  (version ?) x86
FC (version ?) x86
SUSE (verion ?) x86

-
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]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

Great!  Write that down with your votes.  (Note, I was just kicking this 
off, not being comprehensive...)


Mikhail Fursov wrote:

My 2 cents:

1. The OS is not enough. Some bugs are reproducable on multicore systems
only. + We do actually support only platforms with SSE instructions set 
now.

So Pentium2 and older are not supported.

2. We can review the list of the supported platforms
every periodically. So the current list is just for the next N months.


On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
a community commit to support.

I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
bugs that specifically affect that platform"

Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what
you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
using a broad brush :


Windows
===
Windows XP x86

Linux
=
Ubuntu 6 x86
Ubuntu 5 x86
RHEL  (version ?) x86
FC (version ?) x86
SUSE (verion ?) x86

-
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]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

Throw it out there!  It's a poll!

Justin Zheng wrote:

Why only x86? How about x64 & MIPS?

Thanks.

Best Regards,

Justinz


On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
a community commit to support.

I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
bugs that specifically affect that platform"

Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what
you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
using a broad brush :


Windows
===
Windows XP x86

Linux
=
Ubuntu 6 x86
Ubuntu 5 x86
RHEL  (version ?) x86
FC (version ?) x86
SUSE (verion ?) x86

-
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]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Naveen Neelakantam]

Fedora Core 5, x86 please.  It is the only platform that I use, and I  
use it daily.  :-)


I can volunteer a machine that runs nightly tests (although I'm not  
sure how that works).  Also, I can report bugs when I personally see  
them.  However, I tend to work of relatively stable branches and  
update infrequently.


Naveen


On Oct 16, 2006, at 10:57 AM, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:

We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in  
community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that  
we as a community commit to support.


I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the  
community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are  
users that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to  
find and fix bugs that specifically affect that platform"


Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see  
what's popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in  
indicating what you think should be reported.  Don't vote against  
anything. To start, using a broad brush :



Windows
===
Windows XP x86

Linux
=
Ubuntu 6 x86
Ubuntu 5 x86
RHEL  (version ?) x86
FC (version ?) x86
SUSE (verion ?) x86

-
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]

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Mikhail Fursov]

My 2 cents:

1. The OS is not enough. Some bugs are reproducable on multicore systems
only. + We do actually support only platforms with SSE instructions set now.
So Pentium2 and older are not supported.

2. We can review the list of the supported platforms
every periodically. So the current list is just for the next N months.


On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
a community commit to support.

I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
bugs that specifically affect that platform"

Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what
you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
using a broad brush :


Windows
===
Windows XP x86

Linux
=
Ubuntu 6 x86
Ubuntu 5 x86
RHEL  (version ?) x86
FC (version ?) x86
SUSE (verion ?) x86

-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]





--
Mikhail Fursov

Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms

[Justin Zheng]

Why only x86? How about x64 & MIPS?

Thanks.

Best Regards,

Justinz


On 10/16/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in
community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as
a community commit to support.

I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the
community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users
that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix
bugs that specifically affect that platform"

Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's
popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what
you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start,
using a broad brush :


Windows
===
Windows XP x86

Linux
=
Ubuntu 6 x86
Ubuntu 5 x86
RHEL  (version ?) x86
FC (version ?) x86
SUSE (verion ?) x86

-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[general] POLL : supported platforms

[Geir Magnusson Jr.]

We're a volunteer project, so "supported" is based on interest in 
community.  Lets be clear by writing down a set of platforms that we as 
a community commit to support.


I think we can define "support" as - "one or more people in the 
community tests on that platform on a regular basis, there are users 
that use that platform, and we have people volunteering to find and fix 
bugs that specifically affect that platform"


Just throw things out there and we'll gather the results and see what's 
popular.  We'll summarize in 3 days.  Please be clear in indicating what 
you think should be reported.  Don't vote against anything. To start, 
using a broad brush :



Windows
===
Windows XP x86

Linux
=
Ubuntu 6 x86
Ubuntu 5 x86
RHEL  (version ?) x86
FC (version ?) x86
SUSE (verion ?) x86

-
Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]