harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew Zhang" <zhanghuang...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general] Harmony Q2 release requirements
Date Tue, 06 Mar 2007 02:53:34 GMT
On 3/6/07, Stepan Mishura <stepan.mishura@gmail.com> 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).
>
> Sure, every effort for completing public API is very valuable for us.
> Andrew, keep up your great work!


Thanks, Stepan, Harmony-3271 has been there. :)

-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
>



-- 
Best regards,
Andrew Zhang

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