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
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.
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
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
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
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 10/25/06, 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
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
,
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
.
-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
-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
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
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
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
: [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
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
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
: 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
-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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
@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
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
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
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
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,
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
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
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
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)
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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.
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?
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
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
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.
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
@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
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
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
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.
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
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
68 matches
Mail list logo
