river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dan Creswell <dan.cresw...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Remaining Work For Next Release
Date Fri, 01 Apr 2011 21:28:39 GMT
Not really the constructive dialog I was after...

On 1 April 2011 20:27, Jason Pratt <jpratt3000@gmail.com> wrote:

> i am stating that the first "graduated" release should work for everyone
> period. after that if you want to release with known bugs and reduce/not
>

Uh huh - what I can't understand is your logic for why that must be the
case?


> support sparc or whatever other platform you in your infinite wisdom deem
>

My infinite wisdom? I didn't say I was wise or a know it all.


> irrelevant , great. river should have one release it can point at for
> anyone
> wanting to try/use it.
>

Why? What would that mean? What does that achieve?


>
> regarding supporting systems, if ubuntu, amd, redhat, intel, apple, etc.
> don't send you equipment and software to test on, are you going to drop
> support for them as well? doesn't apache have these things internally? have
> you asked?
>
>
I was asking questions to encourage discussion of a broader point, not
stating a definitive position:

" I don't see a proper discussion about that balance just...."


> you can be as antagonistic as you like, i deal with children everyday ;-)
>
>

> On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 9:46 PM, Dan Creswell <dan.creswell@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Why should it be valid for everyone?
> >
> > So far the conversation has mostly amounted to "save the SPARC user" at
> any
> > cost and that cost includes "penalise all other users".
> >
> > Is that latter cost something we think we should be asserting? And for
> how
> > long?
> >
> > Further, if those using SPARC can't lend us a box to test on, how serious
> > are they about their investment in River? Simply and brutally, they're
> not
> > supporting us (an opensource co-operative effort), why would we in turn
> > support them?
> >
> > Last up, if we are to support these SPARC users and they won't provide
> the
> > kit, we have to obtain it and maintain it etc - how are we doing with
> that?
> > How well can we do that going forward?
> >
> > My point overall then is that there's a balance and as yet, I don't see a
> > proper discussion about that balance just what would be ideal in a
> perfect
> > world.
> >
> > Yeah, I am being a little antagonistic,
> >
> > Dan.
> >
> >
> > On 1 April 2011 09:18, Jason Pratt <jpratt3000@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > sparc was a key architecture when jini was being promoted, maybe not so
> > > much
> > > now. however, at least for a graduation release it should be valid for
> > > everyone sparc included. afterwards if justified it can be phased out.
> > >
> > > antagonism aside, for its first release let give the masses something
> > that
> > > works...
> > >
> > > jason
> > >
> > > On Fri, Apr 1, 2011 at 1:51 PM, Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 3/31/2011 5:41 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> > > >
> > > >> On Wed, Mar 30, 2011 at 5:48 AM, Jason Pratt<jpratt3000@gmail.com>
> > > >>  wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >>> please don't release anything with failures. i've been a big
> fan/user
> > > of
> > > >>> jini since it was released. now that it is alive again via river,
a
> > > good
> > > >>> release history will be key to success/survival
> > > >>>
> > > >>
> > > >> Assume for a second that the failure is related to the SPARC JVM
> > > >> implementation; For how long do you intend us to hold off a release
> to
> > > >> the other 99.9654% of the users, searching for a compatible way to
> > > >> work around the problem?
> > > >>
> > > >> Sometimes, "known bugs" are just that. The "unknown bugs" is in most
> > > >> cases a longer list, and should that also hold off a release until
> we
> > > >> find and correct them?
> > > >>
> > > >> I hope I don't come across as too antagonistic... ;-)  ... just want
> > > >> to provide some perspective.
> > > >>
> > > >
> > > > Here's a key question for the future. Are there users that need River
> > on
> > > > SPARC? Do we go on supporting it? Does anyone care enough to make a
> > > > SPARC development environment available?
> > > >
> > > > Patricia
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

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