harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexey Petrenko" <alexey.a.petre...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [general] Discussion: how to keep up stability and fast progress all together?
Date Sat, 14 Apr 2007 21:22:44 GMT
So it looks like we have few issues to fix :)

SY, Alexey

2007/4/13, Alexei Zakharov <alexei.zakharov@gmail.com>:
> > jEdit?
> > But I'm not sure that it works ok on current class library :)
>
> I've tried to run jEdit on Harmony recently. I was able to start it on
> IBM VME only - it fails to start on JITed version of DRLVM and startup
> takes tooo long in DRLVM's interpreter mode (however, it starts).  But
> even on IBM VME it is not able to work longer than about 10 minutes.
>
> Regards,
>
> 2007/4/4, Alexey Petrenko <alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com>:
> > 2007/4/4, Stepan Mishura <stepan.mishura@gmail.com>:
> > > On 4/4/07, Alexey Petrenko wrote:
> > > <SNIP>
> > > > > > I'd like to propose the next approach that may help us to know
about
> > > > > > instabilities: develop (or take existing one, for example, Eclipse
> > > > > > hello world) a scenario for testing stability and configure
CC to run
> > > > > > it at all times. The stability scenario must be the only one
scenario
> > > > > > for CC; it must be short (no longer then an hour), test JRE
in stress
> > > > > > conditions and cover most of functionality. If the scenario
fails then
> > > > > > all newly committed updates are subject for investigation and
fix (or
> > > > > > rollback).
> > > > > Actually, I prefer something without GUI
> > > > I do not think that remove GUI testing from CC and other stability
> > > > testing is a good way to go. Because awt and swing modules are really
> > > > big and complicated pieces of code.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Sorry for the confusion - I agree that we should continue running
> > > AWT/Swing tests under CC. But we are talking about scenario that can
> > > be used for testing stability in terms of race conditions. The first
> > > scenario that spread in my mind was Eclipse hello world testing
> > > scenario: it is quite short, verifies core functionality and so on.
> > > But Vladimir claimed that there might be some issues related to GUI
> > > testing and we may have a number of 'false alarms'.
> > In fact Eclipse does not use awt and swing at all so it can not be
> > used as a test for these modules.
> >
> >
> > > BTW, do you have any scenario in mind that can be used a stability
> > > criteria (of cause in terms of race conditions)?
> > jEdit?
> > But I'm not sure that it works ok on current class library :)
> >
> > SY, Alexey
> >
> > > > > or at least without using
> > > > > special 'GUI testing" tools. It should improve quality of this testing
> > > > > (than less tools than more predictable results :)) Current "Eclipse
> > > > > hello world" scenario based on the AutoIT for Win and X11GuiTest
for
> > > > > Linux platform. Also we have this scenario based on API calls which
> > > > > should emulate GUI scenario. From these 2 approaches I prefer second
> > > > > to minimize 'false alarms'. Or may be some other scenarios (non-GUI)?
> > > > >
> > > > >  Thanks, Vladimir
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thought? Objections?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > Stepan.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I read the discussion on naming, and M1, M2, ... is fine
by me.  How
> > > > > > > about we pick a proposed date for Apache Harmony M1?
>
>
> --
> Alexei Zakharov,
> Intel ESSD
>

Mime
View raw message