harmony-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Tim Ellison <t.p.elli...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [vote] Declare r711744 as M8
Date Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:00:10 GMT
chunrong lai wrote:
> I can reproduce the error.
> Zhiguo mentioned that we need to reproduce the error with -Xem:opt or
> -Xem:server.

Do we know what the fix is for this?

Just wondering if this is a candidate for inclusion in M8, since it was
a regression since M6.  If the patch would not invalidate the results of
our long running tests then I would like us to consider it since the
crash is severe.

Regards,
Tim

> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 9:49 PM, Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>> Got it -- thanks.
>>
>> Can anyone else reproduce HARMONY-6013 [1] ?  It works for me with a
>> simple test, but if others see a failure that would be a pretty bad
>> regression...
>>
>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-6013
>>
>> Regards,
>> Tim
>>
>> chunrong lai wrote:
>>>  Thanks. I am uploading the snapshots.
>>>
>>> On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 4:53 PM, Sian January <
>> sianjanuary@googlemail.com>wrote:
>>>> Chunrong, are you able to make these available?
>>>>
>>>> 2008/11/10 Tim Ellison <t.p.ellison@gmail.com>:
>>>>  > Sian January wrote:
>>>>>> The testing cycle for r710036 [1] has been completed and the test
>>>>>> results have been discussed [2].
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Two bug fixes [3,4] have been committed since r710036 that we want
to
>>>>>> include in M8. r711744 has not been through the extended testing
>>>>>> cycle, but has been through the standard integrity testing cycle
with
>>>>>> the same results as r710036.[5]
>>>>> Where are the r711744 builds?  I don't see them on the snapshots
>>>>> download page.
>>>>>
>>>>> We have to vote on the actual archive bundle, not just a SVN tag.
>>>>> I'd like to take a look and do a final sanity check.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Tim
>>>>>
>>>>>> As usual there are some long-standing issues and a few new ones,
but
>>>>>> nothing that has been considederd critical so far.  Overall the pass
>>>>>> rate is better than M7.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If anyone thinks that a particular issue is a blocker for M8 please
>> say
>>>> so here.
>>>>>> Otherwise, shall we declare r711744 as M8 and unfreeze the code base?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [1]  http://people.apache.org/~chunrong/snapshots/r710036/index.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [2] http://markmail.org/message/l72lba7xehacqyku
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [3] http://markmail.org/message/6fxgpa2azv27zsol
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [4] http://markmail.org/message/ljqwytbegtsfou2g
>>>>>>
>>>>>> [5] http://people.apache.org/~chunrong/harmony-integrity/
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  --
>>>> Unless stated otherwise above:
>>>> IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number
>>>> 741598.
>>>> Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6
>> 3AU
> 

Mime
View raw message