harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alexey Varlamov" <alexey.v.varla...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [OT] JFYI: Dave Gilbert (jfree.org) on Apache Harmony
Date Wed, 11 Apr 2007 09:13:38 GMT
2007/4/11, Yang Paulex <paulex.yang@gmail.com>:
> 10 Apr 2007 17:39:17 +0400, Egor Pasko <egor.pasko@gmail.com>:
> >
> > 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.
>
>
> I was not proposing to branch to such a detail level, IMO it would be
> difficult to maintain to create branch for every modules in classlib/vm etc.
> My thoughts look like:
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/harmony/enhanced/
> |__ classlib
>     |__trunk
>     |__branches
>         |__java6
> |__drlvm
>    |__trunk
>    |__branches
>         |__java6
> |__jdktools
>    |__trunk
>    |__branches
>         |__java6
> |__...(other directories)
> |__trunk   (federate build for java 5)
> |__branches
>    |__java6 (federate build for java 6)
>
> And I also suggest, as long as possible, check in updates to Java 5 trunk,
> and then merge into Java 6 branch, because, as you said, many improvements
> apply to both Java 5 and 6. And in case other components don't have much
> difference between Java 6 and 5, we can just create a java6 trunk for
> classlib and federate build as pilot at first

Good idea to start with classlib as pilot, but do we really need to
branch the federated build? I suppose Stepan meant just tweak it for
supporting extra property for a desired branch.

>
> 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
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Paulex Yang
> China Software Development laboratory
> IBM
>

Mime
View raw message