harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Mazzocchi <stef...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [performance] a few early benchmarks
Date Mon, 27 Nov 2006 17:28:20 GMT
Mikhail Loenko wrote:
> 2006/11/27, Stefano Mazzocchi <stefano@apache.org>:
>> Mikhail Loenko wrote:
>> > Not sure that when we elect an official benchmark we should take
>> > into account whether it's open or not.
>> You're kidding, right?
> no. not at all

Then you have to realize that not everybody has the $$$ or the intention
to spend money to help us optimize Harmony. No, worse: such carelessness
for open participation is poisonous to the creation a more diverse and
distributed development community.

This is not an closed-development project anymore, the rules have
changed: we need to think in terms of lowering participation obstacles,
not in terms of pleasing our upper management or our potential customers.

Our main and only objective is to please our users, and reducing the
barrier for them to become developers as much as we possibly can. And
that sometimes includes making compromises with our own personal (or
job-related) interests.

If you (or anybody else around you) care about those, you are more than
welcome to continue on that path, submit code changes, results and
ideas... but pretending that an entire community bases its performance
results on something potential developers would have to pay to get
access to is equivalent of destroying the ability for
non-corporate-sponsored individuals to help in that space.

And, I'm sorry, but such discrimination won't make me (and a lot of
people like me) happy.

Let me be crystal clear: you are and will continue to be *more than
welcome* to benchmark with anything you (or anybody around you) cares
about and work with those results. But benchmarks have two objectives:
show the current performance status *and* allow potential developers to
test if their changes have made a positive impact before submitting them.

Now that we are an open development project, we must learn,
collectively, to think in terms of 'what can I do to acquire more
development participation', not only in terms of 'what can I do to
acquire more users'.

DaCapo fits both goals very well. Spec fits the first, partially.

And, finally, I don't care if Spec it's the industry standard: if we
were driven by following what everybody else was doing, there would be
no Harmony in the first place.


View raw message