harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Slava Shakin" <vyacheslav.p.sha...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [drlvm] IPF functionality
Date Fri, 13 Oct 2006 07:44:48 GMT

I have an opposite concern: will the main trunk guarantee it always builds 
and works on IPF.
IMO this will soon become critical for the IPF porting effort but will imply 
passing certain pre-commit tests on IPF for any changes which potentially 
affect working on this platform. Which relates to another discussion about 
the list platforms to test each commit on.

The first stage of IPF porting effort will probably be porting classlibs and 
running things in VM interpreter mode. Perhaps, it makes sense to keep 
everything in the main trunk during this period. But later we will likely 
want a separate branch.

Slava Shakin, Intel Middleware Products Division

"Mikhail Fursov" <mike.fursov@gmail.com> wrote in message 
> On 10/13/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
>> It's harmless now...given it's not interfering with the other stuff,
>> what's the problem?
> Geir,
> your proposal  "to solve a problem only when you feel that it is a 
> problem"
> sounds reasonable.
> Right now IPF code is harmless and we can try to start with the trunk. 
> Once
> we feel that IPF code needs more freedom or our commiters are too 
> overloaded
> to check IPF patches on IA32 we can create a branch for IPF. I'm OK with 
> it.
> I proposed to use separate branch initially only because I know how it
> works. Do-everything-in-the-trunk is a new technique to me :)
> -- 
> Mikhail Fursov

Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html
To unsubscribe, e-mail: harmony-dev-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org

View raw message