Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-harmony-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 31215 invoked from network); 6 Mar 2007 09:14:23 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Mar 2007 09:14:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 15192 invoked by uid 500); 6 Mar 2007 09:14:25 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-harmony-dev-archive@harmony.apache.org Received: (qmail 15145 invoked by uid 500); 6 Mar 2007 09:14:25 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@harmony.apache.org Received: (qmail 15136 invoked by uid 99); 6 Mar 2007 09:14:25 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Mar 2007 01:14:25 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com designates 66.249.92.173 as permitted sender) Received: from [66.249.92.173] (HELO ug-out-1314.google.com) (66.249.92.173) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 06 Mar 2007 01:14:15 -0800 Received: by ug-out-1314.google.com with SMTP id z36so105224uge for ; Tue, 06 Mar 2007 01:13:53 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=GO61BvXpuqkfYM53xEKasHEUGbwh78IEdp9DwbFHCVr2eNxkEHxn5GM3xW4AHQzPIQCNhoD5qc69t/uG5aYOFQZWaqaRAsHQmqC1q6YSjYi728QZPNRA6TVE+SRSrh/rEaTQLrA96evpF3L29mOw6jdbr4cJ+HrMiC9VNlZeMv8= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=k0ghVSCuaI1v0t51qGkB0GD5jW30zwkf1VknUr1tlwzwK2A4gNuWcQXKzScC1W7BYT2fB0i2p/kv9RodGqkj6o5zSt3RRk1pqPNytNFvpCMtCNG57U7m8/dXtioj7EznZ9ZRm0qKoWxnbl7WiVpypstC0u2Zme4JqP2748cDXmQ= Received: by 10.114.159.1 with SMTP id h1mr1645218wae.1173172429787; Tue, 06 Mar 2007 01:13:49 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.114.120.5 with HTTP; Tue, 6 Mar 2007 01:13:48 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: Date: Tue, 6 Mar 2007 12:13:48 +0300 From: "Alexey Petrenko" To: dev@harmony.apache.org Subject: Re: [general] Harmony Q2 release requirements In-Reply-To: <906dd82e0703050647g20526ec0r32eb48d91b733fc7@mail.gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <906dd82e0703050053j19350331w9376df0c3d3331ad@mail.gmail.com> <906dd82e0703050647g20526ec0r32eb48d91b733fc7@mail.gmail.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org 2007/3/5, Mikhail Loenko : > 2007/3/5, Alexey Petrenko : > > 2007/3/5, Mikhail Loenko : > > > 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? :) I think that this can be achieved for a limited set of benchmarks. SY, Alexey