Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of gcjhd-harmony-dev@m.gmane.org
 designates 80.91.229.2 as permitted sender)
To: dev@harmony.apache.org
From: Egor Pasko <egor.pasko@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [OT] JFYI: Dave Gilbert (jfree.org) on Apache Harmony
Date: 11 Apr 2007 14:06:17 +0400
Lines: 121
Message-ID: <0vqtzvndy3q.fsf@gmail.com>
References: <0vq3b3cf1ir.fsf@gmail.com>
 <bc79dd600704071607k5704707j42f44cd6319686c@mail.gmail.com>
 <4d0b24970704080043p4ac8dc0o40e721f66d3eab00@mail.gmail.com>
 <c3755b3a0704091243w67b25532p27c09870d6937f3d@mail.gmail.com>
 <f982cec50704091924m4fa2264cmdaefea4b610926ac@mail.gmail.com>
 <6e47b64f0704102114l58a0bbdeh5c3fb880492f46e1@mail.gmail.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.4
Sender: news <news@sea.gmane.org>

On the 0x2B5 day of Apache Harmony Stepan Mishura wrote:
> On 4/10/07, Yang Paulex wrote:
> > 2007/4/10, Alexey Petrenko :
> > >
> > > 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?
> >
> 
> As far as I understood you proposal the first step may be to create
> java6 branch for class library, update build.xml in federated build
> and see how thing will work. This will make possible for people
> contribute to 6.0 API development and learn how to work with SVN
> branches. Correct?

Yep. I do not really feel whether API needs branching or not, so I
cannot make any suggestions. The two options are:
1) branch
2) build flag for triggering result build: 5 or 6
where both have known pros and cons.

My original suggestion is that for JIT number 2 (build flag) is
ideal. And probably for DRLVM too.


> Thanks,
> Stepan.
> 
> > [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
> >
> 
> 
> -- 
> Stepan Mishura
> Intel Enterprise Solutions Software Division
> 

-- 
Egor Pasko