harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Egor Pasko <egor.pa...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general] POLL : supported platforms
Date Thu, 19 Oct 2006 04:13:19 GMT
On the 0x207 day of Apache Harmony Mikhail Loenko wrote:
> Good! :)
> 
> Now it's more or less clear about the categories that we have and I suggest
> that we discuss policies around the categories.
> 
> Probably we will have weaker policies for the current stage of the project and
> stricter policies when we are closer to release.
> 
> I suggest that we discuss current policies first.
> 
> For the category "Yes" or "Supported" we do our best to not break it with
> commits. "Do our best" to be defined later. If a commit breaks that platform
> we stop further commits and either fix or roll it back ASAP. Comments?
> 
> For the category "In-progress" we should probably have weaker policies
> comparing to "Supported", but we still need some. Ideas?
> Possibly we should try not to break it and if we break then discuss
> whether it was intentionally or not and may decide to roll it back or
> do something
> else. Other ideas?

Yes, I am thinking about the same. And in terms of "Yes" there should
be not a large number of platforms (freesing commits is expensive).

In this way, "In-Progress" does not seem very good. Because the
"progress" never ends. I propose "fast support" and "slow support".

"Yes" == "Supported" == "critical-to-repair platform set" should be
kept small enough. I would vote for <7 for today. We can have more as
community grows. I performed no scientific estimations for the number,
of course:)

> Thanks,
> Mikhail
> 
> 2006/10/19, Alex Blewitt <alex.blewitt@gmail.com>:
> > Even better:
> >
> > Yes
> > No
> > Maybe
> >
> > :-)
> >
> > On 18/10/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
> > > Better :
> > >
> > > Supported
> > > Not-Supported
> > > In-Progress
> > >
> > >
> > > Mikhail Fursov wrote:
> > > > Mikhail,
> > > > I support your classification: it covers all types I can imagine.
> > > >
> > > > Here is my proposal of naming:
> > > > 1) "not supported"
> > > > 2) "product" or "supported"
> > > > 3) "incubation"
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <mloenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Well, I think there are at least three categories of platforms:
> > > >>
> > > >> 1) Platforms that we don't care about
> > > >> 2) Platforms that we think work and we want them working
> > > >> 3) Platforms that we want working but they still don't
> > > >>
> > > >> We definitely have to roll back the commits that break #2.
> > > >>
> > > >> We need some 'protection' policy to make it possible for platforms
> > > >> to graduate from #3 to #2
> > > >>
> > > >> And we need some criteria to define how #1 could become #3
> > > >>
> > > >> And we need names for the categories that are not misleading
> > > >>
> > > >> Comments?
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >> Mikhail
> > > >>
> > > >> 2006/10/18, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com>:
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Mikhail Fursov wrote:
> > > >> > > Mikhail,
> > > >> > > The situation is possible with some Linux clones.
> > > >> > > And if we have such a situation I propose to take into account
if we
> > > >> have a
> > > >> > > commiter/volunteer to check this platform.
> > > >> > > If we have a volunteer  - we support it.
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > Another question is: what if volunteer is gone and no one
supports
> > > >> the
> > > >> > > platform? Will we claim that Harmony no longer supports
the platform?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > No - to be supported, we have to agree as a community.  I'm wary
about
> > > >> > there being one-person-supported platforms.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > We can easily have two categories -
> > > >> >
> > > >> > a) platforms that we certify as being compatible, and support
> > > >> >
> > > >> > b) platforms that we certify as being compatible, but don't make
any
> > > >> > support promises
> > > >> >
> > > >> > geir
> > > >> >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > > On 10/18/06, Mikhail Loenko <mloenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> 2006/10/17, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com>:
> > > >> > >> >
> > > >> > >> >
> > > >> > >> > Mikhail Loenko wrote:
> > > >> > >> > > 2006/10/17, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com>:
> > > >> > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> > >> Mikhail Fursov wrote:
> > > >> > >> > > I think if we decide to support a platform
then we define a set
> > > >> of
> > > >> > >> tests
> > > >> > >> > > that
> > > >> > >> > > must pass on that platform after each commit
and we do roll back
> > > >> if
> > > >> > >> they
> > > >> > >> > > fail. That is how I understand "support"
> > > >> > >> >
> > > >> > >> > Lets define support as passing >90% of classlib
unit and
> > > >> > >> > smoke/c-unit/kernel in DRLVM
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> It might be a criteria for addition to the set of supported,
but
> > > >> can't
> > > >> > >> be a definition.
> > > >> > >> Logically there could be a platform that we don't know,
but that
> > > >> platform
> > > >> > >> could
> > > >> > >> pass 99% of the tests, do you think we can support a
platform we
> > > >> don't
> > > >> > >> have any
> > > >> > >> idea about?
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> Thanks,
> > > >> > >> Mikhail
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >> >
> > > >> > >> > geir
> > > >> > >> >
> > > >> > >> >
> > > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >> > >> > 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
> > > >> > >> >
> > > >> > >> >
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >> > >> 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
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >>
> > > >> > >
> > > >> > >
> > > >> >
> > > >> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >> > 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
> > > >> >
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >> 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
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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
> > >
> > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
> >
> >
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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
> 
> 

-- 
Egor Pasko, Intel Managed Runtime Division


---------------------------------------------------------------------
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


Mime
View raw message