harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alex Blewitt" <alex.blew...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general] proposal : starting a release train
Date Thu, 08 Mar 2007 19:27:15 GMT
We ought to have a version monkier as well as M1, to ensure we don't
get confused in the future. Apache Harmony 1.0M1 would make sense, or
if we want to sync with the proposed Java versioning numbers then
Apache Harmony 5.0M1 might make sense.

If we are going to release version numbers then is there a plan of
what the milestones will contain? If we're going to have M1, we should
explain (roughly) what M2 and M3 will have, to give people an idea of
where we're going.

Alex.

On 08/03/07, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
>
> On Mar 8, 2007, at 12:03 PM, Alex Blewitt wrote:
>
> > At this stage, are we allowed to use the trademark Java in the name
> > since we haven't passed the TCK?
> >
>
> Probably not :)
>
> But I wasn't suggesting we do that until we get to that point.  So
> for now, we can call it
>
>
>     Apache Harmony M1
>
> or such...
>
> geir
>
>
> > Alex.
> >
> > On 08/03/07, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Mar 8, 2007, at 5:05 AM, Sian January wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi Geir,
> >> >
> >> > Just a quick thought about the names.  I like the idea of having
> >> > milestone
> >> > releases (M1, M2 etc).  However if the release is called "Apache
> >> > Harmony Pre
> >> > M1" or "Apache Harmony M1", and then we want to use M1, M2 etc for
> >> > future
> >> > versions like Java 6 and Java 7 how will we tell the difference
> >> > between the
> >> > Java 5 M1 release and the Java 6 M1 release?
> >>
> >> That's a good question...
> >>
> >> I think that once we get out the door, maybe we call it
> >>
> >>    Apache Harmony Java SE 5 M1
> >>
> >> or
> >>
> >>    Apache Harmony Java SE 6 M1
> >>
> >> or
> >>
> >>    Apache Harmony v5 M1
> >>
> >> or
> >>
> >>   Apache Harmony v6 M1
> >>
> >> or
> >>
> >>    I dunno... :)
> >>
> >> If you have another idea, go for it :)
> >>
> >> I just wanted to give us names to start using for sorting bugs,
> >> targeting features, and working towards.
> >>
> >> geir
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> >
> >> > Sian
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On 07/03/07, Geir Magnusson Jr. <geir@pobox.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> This is a new thread, building on the thread that Mikhail
> >> started, to
> >> >> get away from some of the shoals we encountered.
> >> >>
> >> >> I'd like to propose we start a formal release schedule :
> >> >>
> >> >> *  Monthly releases, targeted for the last day of each
> >> >>     month. (IOW, avoid the April 1 release)
> >> >>
> >> >> *  For some set of platforms that we support
> >> >>
> >> >> *  Regression free (if we support an app or feature in release X,
> >> >>     we support it in X+1 unless we agree in a vote to
> >> >>     regress).
> >> >>
> >> >> A lot of good things will come from starting down this road :
> >> >>
> >> >> 1) We can start putting together the process to decide on "code
> >> >> freeze", building and testing, etc.
> >> >>
> >> >> 2) This will allow us to do JIRA triage that is meaningful - we
> >> can
> >> >> pre-set the releases in JIRA, and bucket the JIRAs into the
> >> release
> >> >> buckets
> >> >>
> >> >> 3) We can chart out what we want to do in Wiki (and then
> >> harvest for
> >> >> the site) what we hope to accomplish in each release.  Up to
> >> now, the
> >> >> roadmap was very high-level, and for the most part, we've been
> >> >> amazingly good at following it (especially considering it was a
> >> SWAG
> >> >> done in response to a question I got on a concall once...)  I
> >> would
> >> >> love to see us chart out the remainder of the API, some sense
> >> of VM
> >> >> feature (like "switch to GCv5"), and a set of apps we plan to have
> >> >> running.
> >> >>
> >> >> An important element to this will be naming.  I think that as
> >> we're
> >> >> just figuring this out, we should avoid date-oriented names (like
> >> >> "March", "April"...) so we can shift the schedule as need be.
> >> While
> >> >> I like the "M1, M2, M3" scheme,  I personally utterly detest the
> >> >> "1.0-
> >> >> M1" approach, as it ties your hands horribly.  I think that we
> >> should
> >> >> avoid prefixing a version number for now, and use version numbers
> >> >> when we get the JCK and can plan out a 0.5, 0.6, 0.7... to 1.0
> >> train
> >> >>
> >> >> So it could be
> >> >>
> >> >> Apache Harmony Pre M1
> >> >> Apache Harmony Pre M2
> >> >> Apache Harmony Pre M3
> >> >> ...
> >> >>
> >> >> for now.   This is really common and banal.  Boring....
> >> >>
> >> >> We're building on the shoulders of giants here, and I think it
> >> would
> >> >> be nice to honor those that came before us.  Here's a list of
> >> great
> >> >> people in the history of Java who I'd love to honor, as many
> >> are my
> >> >> heros :
> >> >>
> >> >> 1) "Hamilton" (Graham, The Enforcer)
> >> >> 2) "Bloch" (Josh, API hero)
> >> >> 3) "Gafter" (Neil, API hero)
> >> >> 4) "Bracha" (Gilad, VM hero)
> >> >> 5) "Click" (Cliff Click, hotspot hero)
> >> >> 6) "Gingel" (Rob, Chief Engineer, and guy who grokked OSS)
> >> >> 7) "Detlefs" (David, GC hero)
> >> >> 8) "Lindholm" (Tim, VM spec guy)
> >> >> 9) "Yellin" (Frank, VM spec guy)
> >> >>
> >> >> Thoughts?  Comments?  Flames?
> >> >>
> >> >> geir
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Unless stated otherwise above:
> >> > IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with
> >> > number
> >> > 741598.
> >> > Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire
> >> > PO6 3AU
> >>
> >>
>
>

Mime
View raw message