harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Egor Pasko <egor.pa...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [OT] JFYI: Dave Gilbert (jfree.org) on Apache Harmony
Date Tue, 10 Apr 2007 13:39:17 GMT
On the 0x2B4 day of Apache Harmony Yang Paulex wrote:
> 2007/4/10, Alexey Petrenko <alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com>:
> >
> > Yeah, let's start a branch.
> 
> 
> So let's heads up a little into a little details :), currently in  Harmony
> svn enhanced directory[1], we have classlib/drlvm/jdktools/others in
> separated directories, and every directories has a subdirectory trunk, the
> problem now is, do we branch whole enhanced directory[1], or create a branch
> for every modules? I prefer the latter one a little, because: 1. not every
> module needs(or wants) branch; 2. it's convenient for guys only working on
> one area to maintain, for example, it's easier to a classlib contributor to
> follow all classlib changes. I guess that's why the current directory
> structure looks like.
> 
> If so, another issue is how to deal with the federate build directory[2],
> which aims at combining all modules as a whole HDK, depending on its
> build.xml to "svn switch" subdirectory to relevant modules. Now I suggest we
> either create a enhanced/branch/java6 for federate build, or update the
> build.xml so that some options can be used to specify which branch the
> federate build will use.
> 
> Ideas?

If we are considering branches for different components, I should say
that for JIT branching does not make sense. All difference I know of
related to JIT is disabled subroutines in bytecode, that can be
triggered with some Verifier's compile-time option.

In case I am not mistaken in the estimation, we should better support
JIT in a single trunk.

> [1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/harmony/enhanced/
> [2] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/harmony/enhanced/trunk
> 
> 2007/4/8, Andrew Zhang <zhanghuangzhu@gmail.com>:
> > > On 4/8/07, Mikhail Fursov <mike.fursov@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Bloggers blog while developers work :)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > I like we pushed RI to become open source. I like our scores in
> > benchmarks
> > > > and I like our plans on stability improvements for the next quarter.
> > >
> > >
> > > Ya,  but we need to do something more to prove that  Harmony is not only
> > > toy.
> > >
> > > One thing I agree with the blog is about "branch". We need to think more
> > > about branch.
> > >
> > > It's easy to use branch, but porting back fix and merge sound like
> > nightmare
> > > to me.
> > >
> > > What I really miss is an absence of Geir in our mailing list last
> > weeks...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On 07 Apr 2007 23:05:48 +0400, Egor Pasko <egor.pasko@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > $subj:
> > > > > http://jroller.com/page/dgilbert?entry=the_death_of_apache_harmony
> > > > >
> > > > > entitled:
> > > > > The Death of Apache Harmony
> > > > >
> > > > > Just to let you know, and no comments.
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Egor Pasko
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Mikhail Fursov
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Best regards,
> > > Andrew Zhang
> > >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Paulex Yang
> China Software Development laboratory
> IBM

-- 
Egor Pasko


Mime
View raw message