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: impatient ;)
Date Mon, 16 May 2005 01:08:36 GMT
On May 15, 2005, at 7:32 PM, Listreader account wrote:


> Hello all,
>
> On Sun, May 15, 2005 at 06:42:16PM -0400, Patrice Le Vexier wrote:
>
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> correct me if i'm wrong, but, to make a J2SE platform, we need:
>>
>> - a compiler (javac)
>> - a JVM (maybe a simple interpreter at first time, then a jit/wat/=20
>> xxx of the
>> death)
>> - class library (classpath as good bet)
>> - some tools (appletviewer, keytool etc)
>> - an installer
>> - ...
>>
>>
>
> True, but from an architect's point of view, I believe we should look
> closer at some fundamentals WRT requirements and at a common
> implementation layer. Questions such as
>
> a) Do we have a go from Apache and Sun Legal to actually pursue this
>    project? (Noone wants to end up in a legal battle somewhere down  
> =20=
>


> the
>    road).
>
>    =3D=3D> Geir? Your ball?
>

No, we don't.  We are doing this project.  There's no legal issue =20
right now.


>
> b) Which OS's should be targeted?
>    (This gives info for a baseline to installation and OS
>    abstraction layers.)
>
>    Given experience from some large open source projects such as =20
> Debian
>    GNU/Linux, targeting a multitude of OS'es can slow down the project
>    considerably - while at the same time creating a de-facto =20
> standard in
>    strength of its many platform options.
>
>    =3D=3D> Is it sensible to start with the OSs [Windows 2K/XP,  
> Linux =20=
>


> <pick
>        libc version>, Solaris, Mac OS X]?
>

Right - we shouldn't target a specific OS.  I think that with a =20
careful OS/(VM|class lib) boundary, we let people port as they need to.


>
> c) Could we augment the proposed architecture in
>    (http://people.apache.org/~geirm/harmony.jpg) by introducing an OS
>    abstraction layer (OAL) to failitate porting? (Similar to the
>    strategy used for GCC porting.)
>

yes - that was the intent


>
>    I attach a small and quickly scribbled image describing this; =20
> will do
>    a proper architecture sketch should the need arise.
>

The attachment didn't come through.


>
> d) What strategy do we pick WRT JDK tool implementation? I would
>    recommend that we create a common library that can be used by all
>    tools. That way, we can minimize the porting effort to different
>    OS'es and have a single library to distribute instead of a splay
>    of smaller ones.
>
>    Attaching a small sketch on the structure.
>
>

didn't come through


>
>
>> I know we're at the very first stage of the development and a lot =20
>> of stuff
>> are currently actively discussed, but is there nothing of this =20
>> list we can
>> begin to code, maybe just as proof of concept, or to try some =20
>> solutions ?
>>
>>
>
> Since Harmony is potentially an *extremely* important project, I
> recommend that we stick to the Apache development process. We will =20
> have
> quite a lot to code soon enough.
>

As long as it's an apache process, that's what we'll do.

geir


>
> Patience.
>
> ;)
>
> ---
> // Lennart J=F6relid, Senior J2EE Architect
> // jGuru Europe AB
> // lj@jguru.se
>
>

--=20
Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
geir@optonline.net





-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org



Mime
View raw message