harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>
Subject Re: timeframe for mid-level decissions
Date Thu, 19 May 2005 10:19:07 GMT

On May 19, 2005, at 5:24 AM, Jakob Praher wrote:

> Hi Leo,
> Leo Simons wrote:
>> Hi Jakob!
>> On 18-05-2005 22:29, "Jakob Praher" <jpraher@yahoo.de> wrote:
>>> When do you want the first Harmony J2SE alpha snapshots to reach  
>>> the masses?
>> "when they're ready"
> I think that the psychological aspect of having actual some
> milestones/deadlines helps sort out some of the long-term stuff  
> from the
>   short term hacking. Especially in VM technology there is so much  
> great
> stuff out there - so many projects to build on - that you might never
> reach a point of concensus, if you only ship when everyone is happy  
> with
> it. IMHO thinking about this "big picture" stuff helps sort out some
> infrastructure decisions:
> -> do we want to concentrate on the server side (jikes rvm would
> probably be fine for that) - for instance: no startup issues
> -> do we want to build something that competes with sun j2se/mono  
> on the
> desktop side (gnome/redhat would be interested in that)

Both of these are conventional expectations, and we can meet this via  
pluggability, right?

> -> do we want to have different projects for different tasks (is that
> effordable now - what is harmony then - a meta project?)

Not now - right now, I think we stick close together until we start  
getting big.  This *will* get big, but I think that the structure  
should be driven over time.

> -> are the java specs anough for vm interoperability or should we add
> yet another interoperability layer between runtimes?

I don't understand

> -> should we just be a forum for vm implementors and should we specify
> cross vm stuff (like the gnu.gcj.RawData class) in terms of  
> enhancement
> requests?

I think that we clearly want to implement, but it's not a bad place  
for "enhancement", as long as we are clear that enhancement doesn't  
mean distortion of the standard, or "extending".

> -> how much manpower is available in the early stages - that helps to
> clarify how broad the first aim would be?

That's coming together.  It's been a week.

> Questions like that are essential for establishing the projects  
> identity.
> I think the best projects (in that area) are those, that have a  
> special
> goal and don't want to be all things to all people. I don't know which
> way harmony is going here.

I think we have a goal, and I do think it's important that we hear  
about alternative paths to get there.  I do agree that such  
discussions can't go on forever, and hence the pushing to start  
looking at some of the existing VMs (both in C and Java).  I'm really  
hoping we can focus a little on that, how we can find ways to couple  
cleanly to GNU Classpath, etc.

> You might disagree here - but i think that this project is a bit
> different from other apache projects. Many things completly depend on
> the initial decisions. So I don't want to see all people waiting for
> some technical decision to take place and thus deadlock their efforts.
> At the same the possibily matrix is so huge that you can't take into
> account every project thats going on. So again: Make some  
> decissions in
> the next months and go for that. Sure the project is in its infancy  
> - I
> don't want to push too much.

Right. Where do you stand on current VMs to look at or language?


Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437

View raw message