Mailing-List: contact harmony-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: local policy)
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Subject: Tests scores on http://harmonytest.org Was: [DRLVM] General stability
Date: Thu, 9 Nov 2006 15:43:42 +0300
Message-ID: <8E389A5F2FEABA4CB1DEC35A25CB39CE6E5F5F@mssmsx411>
Thread-Topic: Tests scores on http://harmonytest.org Was: [DRLVM] General
 stability
thread-index: AccDsfr0O257JBxpRR65JMU/S4acDAASGF1Q
From: "Fedotov, Alexei A" <alexei.a.fedotov@intel.com>
To: <harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org>

Geir,
I like the overall letter.=20

Anton,

I have related question. How can we improve http://harmonytest.org to
make it possible to publish not just pass, fail, or error but numeric
test scores?=20

How this is related to the letter? I believe that stress tests which
were mentioned in the letter may have scores in a way performance tests
do, see
http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/subcomponents/stresstest/index.html

BTW, Egor Pasko requested scores to report documentation quality.

With best regards,
Alexei Fedotov,
Intel Java & XML Engineering

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Geir Magnusson Jr. [mailto:geir@pobox.com]
>Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2006 4:51 AM
>To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
>Subject: Re: [DRLVM] General stability
>
>
>
>Fedotov, Alexei A wrote:
>> Alexey Petrenko wrote,
>>> The only release I can imagine is Harmony Java5SE 100% compatible.
>>> To be Java5SE 100% compatible we need TCK first.
>>
>> +1
>>
>
>Yes - and I still think that talk of a release is a bit premature right
>now.
>
>The key things that I believe we need to focus on are
>
>  a) stability and
>
>  b) completeness.
>
>  c) reliability (which may be 'stability')
>
>(and not always in that order :)
>
>
>Things I'd like to see us do :
>
>1)  We need to drive to fully working unit tests for both DRLVM and
>classlib  (using DRLVM).  Great progress has been made in this area,
and
>  we should probably make this a "campaign" for DRLVM as we did for
>classlib.
>
>2) Add stress tests
>
>3) Get our CC-based build-test framework patched and running on as many
>platforms as possible, reporting breakage into the list.
>
>4) Identify problem areas and focus on them.  For example, threading in
>DRLVM...
>
>I do think of us having a 'zero regression' policy except in cases
where
>we make the explicit decision to break.  (like we did with TM, for
example)
>
>
>> I hesitate to say that again, but we also need to decide about VM we
>> will use for that release. I like the following mission: "Class
library
>> and DRLVM pass TCK on Ubuntu 6". I'm open for any other mission which
is
>> challenging, understandable and short enough.
>
>Well, we'll need Windows XP and RHEL as well.
>
>
>>
>> Writing down this mission certainly shouldn't inhibit individuals
from
>> achieving other goals at Harmony. But it would help the rest of
>> community to concentrate on the common task.
>>
>> 1.
>>
http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Platforms_to_Run_Harmony_Development_Kit_
>> on
>>
>> With best regards,
>> Alexei Fedotov,
>> Intel Java & XML Engineering
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Alexey Petrenko [mailto:alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com]
>>> Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2006 10:36 AM
>>> To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>> Subject: Re: [DRLVM] General stability
>>>
>>> 2006/11/8, Mikhail Fursov <mike.fursov@gmail.com>:
>>>> On 11/8/06, Alexey Petrenko <alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Probably it's time to create some release plan :)
>>>>>
>>>> So let's start this discussion?
>>>> Good idea!
>>>> The only release I can imagine is Harmony Java5SE 100% compatible.
>>> To be Java5SE 100% compatible we need TCK first.
>>> So we could think about some less impressive goal for the first
release
>> :)
>>> SY, Alexey
>>