harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Stepan Mishura" <stepan.mish...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [vmi] Retrieving system properties
Date Thu, 14 Dec 2006 11:08:20 GMT
On 12/14/06, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>
>
>
> Stepan Mishura wrote:
> > On 12/14/06, Alexey Varlamov wrote:
> >>
> >> 2006/12/14, Tim Ellison :
> >> > Alexey Varlamov wrote:
> >> > > Fixed svn as agreed, both classlib and drlvm impl.
> >> >
> >> > Given it a VMI modification I would like to have had a more
> coordinated
> >> > change, so the IBM VME can be changed too.  We are also trying to get
> a
> >> > snapshot out so this would be one I would defer until that is done.
> >>
> >> AFAIU the snapshot is pointless if taken from broken repository state.
> >> All CC systems were FAILED for > 2 days, since the initial
> >> modification which provoked this discussion. I presume it is important
> >> enough to get back to PASSED status quickly.
> >
> >
> >
> > I support Alexey's point here.
>
> I don't think that anyone is debating the goodness of getting things
> fixed.   Thats clear.  The problem is that the I still don't believe
> that the VMI thing was a fix, but rather a tweak to get rid of an
> ambiguity in the API.
>
> So... what was FAILING the CC?



Accoring to CC notifications CC failed after r486100. Vladimir (Ivanov) can
correct me if I'm wrong.

> >
> > Sorry for being annoying but can not really understand what is the
> problem
> > here with restoring things as they were before CC went down. And after
> > that we can work out an appropriate solution and coordinate a change
> > without
> > hurrying.
>
> I agree that things should be fixed ASAP, but I still think that we're
> confused about what the problem is.  I don't agree that a massive
> rollback whenever we see a CC failure is the right thing to do, given
> the cascading problems that can create.
>
> Maybe an improvement in process is when there's a CC failure, someone
> investigate and simply report to the dev list what's going on.  I think
> that's one of our problems right now...  we're not engaging together on
> the CC problems...


I did investigation [1] but as I see now it wasn't enough to attract
attention to CC problems. So what should be done? Just roll back commit and
notify dev-list?

[1]
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/harmony-dev/200612.mbox/%3c6e47b64f0612122227p9371022h3e98701c8caf2d82@mail.gmail.com%3e

Thanks,
Stepan.

geir
>
>
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Stepan.
> >
> > Besides my speculation
> >> was that current agreement reflects IBM VME behavior too so it does
> >> not require urgent update.
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Geir has some further questions on the rationale for the
> change.  Let's
> >> > give it more than 24hrs for agreement before committing.
> >> >
> >> > Regards,
> >> > Tim
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>



-- 
Stepan Mishura
Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message