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 14:47:15 GMT
2007/3/5, Alexey Petrenko <alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com>:
> 2007/3/5, Mikhail Loenko <mloenko@gmail.com>:
> > 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? :)
> No objections! :)
> We definitely need a milestone since milestones helps to keep us and
> Harmony in good shape.
>
> >
> > 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?
>
> I think that we also need performance targets: run some benchmarks and
> demonstrate reasonable results.
> We are using Dacapo and SciMark now [1].

Agreed, we definitely need performance goals

>
> Do we need some additional benchmarks? And what will the reasonable
> target results?

No worse than RI 6.0 ? Do you think we can achieve that in Q2? :)

Thanks,
Mikhail


>
> > Since currently the most stable platform is Windows/IA32 I suggest
> > that Harmony Q2 will be released on that specific platform
> +1
>
> SY, Alexey
>
> [1] http://harmony.apache.org/performance.html
>

Mime
View raw message