Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 39789 invoked from network); 21 Sep 2005 23:58:04 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 21 Sep 2005 23:58:04 -0000 Received: (qmail 39049 invoked by uid 500); 21 Sep 2005 23:57:57 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-harmony-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 38976 invoked by uid 500); 21 Sep 2005 23:57:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 38963 invoked by uid 99); 21 Sep 2005 23:57:56 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 21 Sep 2005 16:57:56 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.4 required=10.0 tests=DNS_FROM_RFC_POST X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy) Received: from [134.134.136.19] (HELO orsfmr005.jf.intel.com) (134.134.136.19) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 21 Sep 2005 16:58:04 -0700 Received: from orsfmr100.jf.intel.com (orsfmr100.jf.intel.com [10.7.209.16]) by orsfmr005.jf.intel.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/d: major-outer.mc,v 1.1 2004/09/17 17:50:56 root Exp $) with ESMTP id j8LNvYTa007051 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2005 23:57:34 GMT Received: from orsmsxvs041.jf.intel.com (orsmsxvs041.jf.intel.com [192.168.65.54]) by orsfmr100.jf.intel.com (8.12.10/8.12.10/d: major-inner.mc,v 1.2 2004/09/17 18:05:01 root Exp $) with SMTP id j8LNvXmj021629 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2005 23:57:34 GMT Received: from orsmsx331.amr.corp.intel.com ([192.168.65.56]) by orsmsxvs041.jf.intel.com (SAVSMTP 3.1.7.47) with SMTP id M2005092116573430704 for ; Wed, 21 Sep 2005 16:57:34 -0700 Received: from orsmsx401.amr.corp.intel.com ([192.168.65.207]) by orsmsx331.amr.corp.intel.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.211); Wed, 21 Sep 2005 16:55:02 -0700 x-mimeole: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5.7226.0 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: [Arch] Suggestion to prioritize JVMTI over JVMPI and JVMDI Date: Wed, 21 Sep 2005 16:55:02 -0700 Message-ID: <59278FC0C48A994BABABD069571E45680C3FF9BB@orsmsx401.amr.corp.intel.com> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: [Arch] Suggestion to prioritize JVMTI over JVMPI and JVMDI Thread-Index: AcW/AbSvR57Zv5bYSM2VpPN9UyC3BgABRHDA From: "Elford, Chris L" To: X-OriginalArrivalTime: 21 Sep 2005 23:55:03.0049 (UTC) FILETIME=[E2315F90:01C5BF07] X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.52 on 10.7.209.16 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Hi all, JVMTI is on track to replace the older JVMPI and JVMDI interfaces. J2SE 5 supports JVMTI and JVMPI/JVMDI but future followons to J2SE are expected to remove support for the older interfaces. Tools vendors seem to be in the process of transitioning to the JVMTI interface. It does not really makes sense to invest too much effort in the Harmony project supporting the JVMPI interface. It would be much more effective to invest the effort making the JVMTI implementation more complete so that it includes more of the optional functionality of JVMTI. I suggest that we concentrate our debug/tools interface work in Harmony to making JVMTI work really well and let JVMPI and JVMDI fall away. Regards, Chris Elford Intel Managed Runtime Division