harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <g...@pobox.com>
Subject Re: [drlvm] Is it time to say goodbye to dear friend GC v4?
Date Sun, 05 Nov 2006 00:22:14 GMT
Yeah, put some logging statements in.  Ask Tim if you need some help ;)

I think we can do as you suggest, or simply document it somewhere. 
Cleaerly if someone knows enough to switch GC, they have hit a manual or 
code somewhere.

I guess when I asked the original question, I was thinking that we 
should just be clear that it's now deprecated, and therefore except for 
required changes to keep compatible w/ the interface to GC, nothing 
should change it.  This was driven by my noticing that there was some 
recent patches that worked on GCv4, not 4.1...

geir


Ivan Volosyuk wrote:
> How we inform users of the code?
> My suggestion is to show some clearly visibly text in console when
> GCv4 is loaded something like:
> *********************************************************************
> * The component is deprecated and will be removed 01/15/07
> * Please stop using it or discuss on
> *     harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
> *********************************************************************
> -- 
> Ivan
> 
> On 11/3/06, Mikhail Fursov <mike.fursov@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 11/3/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > From that argument, I'm now against dropping GCv4, if you actually get
>> > use out of it for verification of threading or other important issues.
>> >
>> > Yes, you can always take older revisions, but that's a pain, and if 
>> that
>> > is a "speedbump" that prevents you from doing those extra tests or
>> > verifications, I'd rather keep it around as a convenience for you. :)
>> >
>> > Seriously - if you need it, lets keep it.
>> >
>>
>> I have an idea:
>> The is an incubation process to accept new projects to Apache. Why not to
>> introduce something like "farewell" process in Harmony that is "reversed
>> incubation" :) ?
>> So the idea is: we all agree that ComponentX is out of date and we should
>> drop it. We can announce that we will drop it in a N months. This will 
>> be a
>> signal for everyone to remove any dependencies (like we have today for 
>> GCv4)
>> in other components during this period.
>>
>> If it is OK we can say that we drop GCv4 in 01/2007 and leave it in the
>> trunk without additional support today .
> 

Mime
View raw message