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: [general] Harmony Q2 release requirements
Date Tue, 06 Mar 2007 13:46:38 GMT

On Mar 5, 2007, at 9:43 PM, Stepan Mishura wrote:

> On 3/5/07, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Mar 5, 2007, at 5:53 AM, Andrew Zhang wrote:
>>
>> > Is public API coverage 100% an urgent goal for Harmony Q2 release?
>>
>> It's our goal for a 1.0 release, and the ultimate goal for the
>> project, so I don't see why we'd relax our efforts to make that  
>> happen.
>
>
> IMHO, we are not going to forget about our ultimate goal - 100%  
> public API.
> "Intermediate" (or "developers", if you like) release is required  
> just to
> show Harmony's progress and quality of existing code by having  
> successfully
> running some apps scenarios and/or theirs tests (that my  
> understanding of
> Mikhail's proposal). That helps to see where we are and what should  
> be done
> first (for example, complete SQL API).

Lets not get distracted by the name.  Clearly, we aren't talking 1.0  
until we hit 100% an pass the JCK.  So lets just call them "builds",  
and always shoot for as high-quality as we can.

We need to start building the process and practice in the project for  
doing this - for doing the build, ensuring the docs are right,  
ensuring it's well tested, doing better packaging than a zip and tgz,  
etc.

I think we have a reasonable base of code to build on to start doing  
this.

geir


>
> Sure, every effort for completing public API is very valuable for us.
> Andrew, keep up your great work!
>
> -Stepan.
>
> geir
>>
>>
>> >
>> > On 3/5/07, Mikhail Loenko <mloenko@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> According to our high-level roadmap [1] we were going to make our
>> >> first release in Q2. Let's define what we would like to see in  
>> our Q2
>> >> release. If there are no objections let's discuss what we want  
>> that
>> >> release being able to do.
>> >>
>> >> I suggest that we focus on stability measured by being able to
>> >> successfully run a few solid applications and by pass rates for  
>> the
>> >> test suites.
>> >> So, I think in Q2 we should 1) run reasonable set of  
>> applications 2)
>> >> have reasonable testing infrastructure and 3) pass reasonable  
>> set of
>> >> test suites.
>> >>
>> >> Though we will be happy to accept all the patches that fix  
>> existing
>> >> problems or add missing functionality, I suggest that people  
>> who hang
>> >> around will focus on those scenarios that we will choose here
>> >>
>> >> Objections? :)
>> >>
>> >> If there are no objections again, I'd like to propose that we will
>> >> target:
>> >>
>> >> 1) keeping all the enabled apps in the "up" state
>> >> (we will create a list of enabled apps and put them all into  
>> cruise
>> >> control)
>> >>
>> >> 2) running 2-3 open source server-side software
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 3) running 2-3 open source developers tools
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 4) setting up necessary testing infrastructure and having near  
>> 100%
>> >> pass rates for the suites we have
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> 5) what about commercial software? Some time ago we agreed that  
>> it's
>> >> OK to report failures/regression of commercial software. Should we
>> >> have them in the "requirements" to our Q2 release?
>> >>
>> >> Since currently the most stable platform is Windows/IA32 I suggest
>> >> that Harmony Q2 will be released on that specific platform
>> >>
>> >> Opinions?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Mikhail
>> >>
>> >> [1] http://harmony.apache.org/roadmap.html
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Best regards,
>> > Andrew Zhang
>>
>>
>
>
> -- 
> Stepan Mishura
> Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division


Mime
View raw message