harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From FaeLLe <mrbillcollec...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Backward compatibility
Date Fri, 13 May 2005 00:29:24 GMT
Everytime i read posts from you lot at Apache i feel more conviced this 
thing is going to be one huge success.

I cant imagine how convincing your salesmen must be !! (If you indeed did 
have salesment to market).

On 5/13/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geirm@apache.org> wrote:
> 
> I didn't cc Gerry - I assume he's subscribed.
> 
> On May 11, 2005, at 6:22 PM, Gerry Steele wrote:
> 
> > I'm a big fan of the Apache foundation but this is one product I'm
> > not too
> > sure is such a good idea as of yet for reasons several:
> >
> >
> >>> Deprecated or non deprecated, we want Harmony to pass the TCK, so
> >>>
> >>>> whatever the TCK wants us to do, we'll do it.
> >>>>
> >
> >
> > I hope you understand what sticking to the TCK entails. When it
> > comes to
> > implementing GUI stuff for instance, your platform will have to
> > fully copy
> > the official JVM's Swing/AWT widgets and all other details in order
> > for the
> > automation and robot driven tests to pass. The JCK testbase for
> > tiger is
> > immense. To get it setup and run is a skill on its own. To get it
> > to pass
> > all tests takes a serious am mount of tweaking and a noteable
> > knowledge of
> > the javatest harness. It will require implementations on things as
> > extensive
> > as CORBA and RMI. We would need passive agents, tname servers etc.
> 
> Indeed. We face the same thing with the J2EE TCK. It's a lot of
> work, but we've proven that it can be done in the Apache environment.
> 
> >
> > Also, when running the TCK bear in mind that you'll have to run the
> > harness
> > with the Sun VM.
> >
> > I'm not sure about the particular extent of the testsuite provided
> > with the
> > TCK you guys are talking about (if there is interest can find out
> > more), but
> > the JCK, which is basically a TCK for the entire J2SE jre and jdk
> > will be
> > going on impossible to pass for an alternative implmentation as
> > everything
> > is written with the Sun JDK/JRE in mind and test cases are adapted
> > in ways
> > that will create an infinite unpredictable series of problems when
> > trying to
> > adapt your code.
> 
> I believe that you may be mistaken, or it's just a problem of
> phrasing :) I'm sure that any tests that are for specific extra-
> specification Sun-specific behavior will be added to the exception
> list and therefore not have to pass. We've run into a few things
> like this w/ the TCK for J2EE. For me, they are just TCK
> implementation mistakes, rather than any requirement to have Sun
> implementations as part of the tested code.
> 
> >
> > Another reason is that I'm not quite sure I see the point. It will
> > take 4-5
> > years or more to even come close to a product like tiger. Sun are
> > already
> > working heavily on mustang and dolphin (to a lesser degree on the
> > latter).
> > As well as this, sun research have many projects looking at the
> > future of
> > the Java VM such as the Barcelona project which will drastically
> > change the
> > implementation of the JVM. For instance to make it more network
> > orientated
> > or to improve resource sharing.
> 
> It's clear that Sun does put a lot of effort into this. But don't
> underestimate what an open source community can do.
> 
> >
> > The latter things (which are yet to see real sun implementation)
> > might be
> > something you guys might then want to take advantage of in order to
> > leverage
> > a selling point of Harmony. Without something like that it's just
> > another
> > attempt at a VM that will be playing catch-up forever.
> 
> We'll see :)
> 
> >
> > Also, don't forget about quality. Sun put a serious amount of money
> > and
> > manpower into ensuring the quality and compatibility of the JVM. A
> > lot of
> > corporations depend on this. They have a regular update release
> > cycle. For
> > instance we are currently working on 1.3.1_16, 1.4.2_09, 5.0_04 &
> > 5.0_05.
> 
> Yes - quality is a major factor here. If we can't have the same
> quality, people won't care, and the code won't be used. That's been
> something we've been aware of since day 1.
> 
> >
> > In a project of this size some of the the test suites take several
> > days to
> > run. Some take many many hours of man power. For excessive
> > thoroughness
> > there also manual JCK and regression test suites. Which, trust me,
> > will not
> > be performed by someone who isn't being paid for it. Things like
> > this don't
> > fit well with the community model.
> 
> I'm not so sure. I can easily see that we can find people that would
> want to be paid to do it, and people that might pay them to do it.
> There's nothing wrong with commercial involvement in projects at
> apache, as long as it's a standard Apache-style, transparent
> meritocracy. Throughout the ASF, you'll find individuals
> participating in projects that are paid by someone to do so.
> 
> >
> > Another worry I have is that the effort here might be better
> > redirect to
> > some other project. We already have Java. Even if harmony does make
> > it to a
> > useable release people will still prefer to use the Sun VM. It will
> > be the
> > platform people build on and it will be the one they trust.
> >
> > I'll be very interested in how this turns out.
> 
> As will we all. Please consider helping us out :)
> 
> geir
> 
> --
> Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
> geirm@apache.org
> 
> 


-- 
www.FaeLLe.com <http://www.FaeLLe.com>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message