harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Vasily Levchenko" <vasily.v.levche...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Releasing scheduling
Date Mon, 14 Apr 2008 02:49:31 GMT
On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 12:51 AM, Alexei Fedotov <alexei.fedotov@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Tim,
> I've caught that the release cycle for Eclipse includes one year
> stabilization period when no new third party code is allowed.  This
> period starts at the end of April and continues for nine months. We
> are trying to catch up to the last train for this year. Vasily, is
> this correct?


Yes it's true... We're unable to inject third parties till on next
iteration  till Ganymede  release . And then we've to wait a year to be in
next release of Eclipse.


>
>
> Thanks.
>
> On Mon, Apr 14, 2008 at 12:04 AM, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Vasily Levchenko wrote:
> >
> > > On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 11:49 PM, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Vasily Levchenko wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Sat, Apr 12, 2008 at 2:11 PM, Alexey Petrenko <
> > > > > alexey.a.petrenko@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >  Vasily,
> > > > >
> > > > > > what is the exact deadline for you to have new Harmony build?
> > > > > > Can you use one of the regular snapshots (not milestone build)?
> > > > > > http://people.apache.org/builds/harmony/snapshots/
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > I afraid that Eclipse IP review procedure require some milestone
> > build.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > Can you answer Alexey's question other question though, what is the
> > > > deadline they are working to?  i.e. why can't they wait until
> Harmony M6
> > is
> > > > released before including the functionality in TPTP?
> > > >
> > >
> > > End of April is deadline, and actually the problem is that we are
> unable
> > to
> > > add third party components after this deadline.
> > >
> >
> >  But I don't understand why?  Presumably this is not their last ever
> > release, so why not wait until the next release to include this
> > functionality from Harmony?  That's how dependencies usually work.
> >
> >  Regards,
> >  Tim
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > The good news that M5 is
> > > passed IP review and next review will be review of diff, that
> > significantly
> > > reduce time of review.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >  <http://people.apache.org/builds/harmony/snapshots/>
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > As far as I remember we spend about a week for milestone build
> > > > > > testing.
> > > > > > However, I believe that we will try to help you since Eclipse
is
> our
> > > > > > best friend :)
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > Note that we need  some special build with additional requirements
> to
> > > > > verifier-ext.lib.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > It's a bit of a late call even if we wanted to change our cycle to
> > > > coincide, and I'm not convinced that we do in this case.
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > I don't  ask  to change  your release cycle, I'm asking about make an
> > > exception in your traditional release scheduling. You probably could
> mark
> > > required snapshot as M6.RC1_Eclipse_TPTP ;) to avoid misunderstandings
> > from
> > > your customers and users.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Tim
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >  2008/4/11, Vasily Levchenko <vasily.v.levchenko@gmail.com>:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hello folks,
> > > > > > >  Recently I and some Eclipse folks have finished prototyping
> java
> > 6
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > support
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >  for Eclipse/TPTP project using Harmony verifier for
> recalculation
> > > > > > > stack
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > map
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >  tables after instrumentation, thanks to Mikhail Loenko
to
> realize
> > > > > > > our
> > > > > > >  requirements to extend verifier functionality. Unfortunately
> > > > > > > extended
> > > > > > >  functionality wasn't included  in M5 release  of HDK,
so
> we're in
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > position
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >  when we need some official snapshot (intermediate release),
> > because
> > > > > > > of
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > some
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >  difference in releasing cycles between Eclipse and Harmony.
> > > > > > > Actually we
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > have
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >  less then couple of weeks to launch legal review for binary
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > contribution of
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >  Harmony verifier in Eclipse CVS.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >  Additionally:
> > > > > > >  Eclipse have some ABI limitation for native code: Windows
all
> > code
> > > > > > > is
> > > > > > >  compiled with VC6, here I expect some incompatibility
with
> > Harmony
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > binaries,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >  for Linux all sources are compiled gcc 2.96.
> > > > > > >  We're also interested that
> > > > > > >  https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-5706(introducing
> > "C"
> > > > > > >  interface) will be on the trunk.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >  So the question  is:  is it possible to make special
> unscheduled
> > > > > > > but
> > > > > > >  official release to meet Eclipse legal and ABI requirements?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >  --vvl
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> With best regards,
> Alexei
>



-- 
--vvl

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message