harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Mikhail Loenko" <mloe...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general] Harmony Q2 release requirements
Date Mon, 05 Mar 2007 12:10:51 GMT
05 Mar 2007 14:31:14 +0300, Egor Pasko <egor.pasko@gmail.com>:
> On the 0x290 day of Apache Harmony Mikhail Loenko wrote:
> > 2007/3/5, Mikhail Loenko <mloenko@gmail.com>:
> > > 05 Mar 2007 12:30:05 +0300, Egor Pasko <egor.pasko@gmail.com>:
> > > > On the 0x290 day of Apache Harmony Mikhail Loenko 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
> > > >
> > > > you mean, we have no time for 2 platforms?
> > >
> > > I mean we should IMHO make a focus: have superb results on a single
> > > platform on a limited set of applications rather than have million
> > > somehow working scenarios
> > > on a dozen of platforms.
> >
> > Does it make sense?
>
> I think, limiting ourselves for the next milestone is a good
> idea. Though, IMHO, limiting ourseles to windows is more of a
> limitation than of making us focused. It does not take much effort to
> support Linux with te same priority of bugfixing (if scenarious are
> pretty automated), but lets people be sure that we are not to break
> their work in favour to support windows faster.
>
> There may be a hybrid strategy: improve on windows, do not break
> anything on Linux, seems pretty acceptable to me.

+1

We should not break anything we already have.
Moreover we should further develop it and accept patches that improve
other platforms, API coverage, enable not-very-popular apps, etc

But we still need to keep the focus in our minds...

Thanks,
Mikhail

>
> --
> Egor Pasko
>
>

Mime
View raw message