Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms
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
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
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
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] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
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, 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms
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
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
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
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
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
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
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] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms
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
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 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 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
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: [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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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: Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms
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
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
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 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
Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms
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 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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 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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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]
Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms
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
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
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
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. 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
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
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. 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
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
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
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
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]
