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: [arch] VM Candidate : JikesRVM http://jikesrvm.sourceforge.net/
Date Tue, 24 May 2005 02:33:04 GMT

On May 23, 2005, at 10:09 PM, Renaud BECHADE wrote:

> >I don't understand this argument.  If our J2SE implementation is
> >feature-comparable to the one from Sun, IBM or BEA, why would we  
> need
> >to add Eclipse onto it?
>
> As a demonstrator: "just test it" [TM].

Then test it!  We don't have to distribute it too :)

> Also, as I said before, if its entry level for developers is high  
> (****
> configuration with Eclipse or some other candidate, the lazy  
> effect, you
> see), then we are digging our grave, because the best way to have  
> other
> projects bundle with the VM is to help them play with it in the  
> first time.
>
> Regards,
>
> RB
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:geirm@apache.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, May 24, 2005 10:49 AM
> To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: [arch] VM Candidate : JikesRVM http:// 
> jikesrvm.sourceforge.net/
>
>
> On May 23, 2005, at 9:35 PM, Renaud BECHADE wrote:
>
>
>>
>>
>> >It would be great if people would bundle Harmony with stuff (and
>> plan
>> >to do it w/ Geronimo when that time comes), bit it's way out of
>> scope
>> >for *this* project to get into the business of reditributing
>> software
>> >from outside of the ASF.
>>
>> Hum... I still think there is a minimum distribution effort to be
>> done (call
>> that marketing if you want) to get people to actually test the VM,
>> as in the
>> beginning it might be very, very, very unlikely that absolutely
>> everything
>> runs out of the box as replacement for J2SE 5 or 6... So we will
>> need to
>> help them try it out.
>>
>
> Yes! And this is classic behavior for OSS projects - once you have
> something useful, you go out and proselytize, helping other projects
> see the value, and use it.
>
> So you go out and get Eclipse to bundle with it, you get Geronimo to
> bundle with it, you get JBoss to bundle with it, you get JOnAS to
> bundle with it, you get Tomcat to bundle with it, you get....
>
> And then you learn from their bundling efforts and make the thing
> even easier to use in that way.
>
> But distributing Eclipse or JBoss from here?  No....
>
>
>> Just think of it in OS terms as a
>> micro-bootable-live-CD-to-demo-it-actually-works-on-useful-cases (a
>> stuff
>> for decision makers). Bundling with 1 or 2 apps we/the ASF did not
>> write is
>> not to be covered by NIH syndrome in my opinion, but rather a way
>> to prove
>> it actually works to decision makers. (After all, mono bundles mono
>> with
>> monodevelop [or rather monodevelop with mono, I think], and Sun
>> bundles
>> Netbeans with J2SE...)
>>
>
> I'd prefer we don't re-distribute other people's software unless part
> of the distribution for which the Apache project provides top-line
> value.
>
> [SNIP]
>
>
>>
>> To come back to more soft-only concerns, IMHO providing
>> distributors with
>> the minimum tool they need to polish the VM-to-VM discrepancies and
>> external
>> developers the minimum tools they need to test their soft on the
>> Harmony VM
>> (and get a chance to actually do something - not just: 'it does not
>> work' -
>> if it does not work the way they planned it) might be a big ROI,
>> comparatively small effort.
>>
>
> That's an entirely different kettle of fish, and I support that.
>
>
>>
>> A VM without the bare minimum support tools might appear a bit
>> useless to
>> many people (and also impractical to test with an ergonomic, long-
>> lasting
>> experience of beautiful-looking piece of software). If you take,
>> say, the
>> FreeBSD case, you don’t have much choice for instance for the VM
>> you use
>> with your favorite IDE, so that ipso facto you stick with the VM
>> you get in
>> stock (because the other VMs might be good, but if it’s a
>> nightmare to
>> reconfigure it all to use your VM of choice with your favorite
>> IDE...), just
>> like IE sticks with many win$ users.
>>
>
> I don't understand this argument.  If our J2SE implementation is
> feature-comparable to the one from Sun, IBM or BEA, why would we need
> to add Eclipse onto it?
>
>
>>
>> As a use case, if I want to test a piece of software, well I would
>> like it
>> to be kind of "download it and play".
>>
>
> Yes!  So we go out there and get everyone to bundle with our J2SE
> distribution.  We go there, do the work, and help them. :)
>
> geir
>
> --
> Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
> geirm@apache.org
>
>
>

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



Mime
View raw message