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 08:46:41 GMT
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

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

Yeah, I am being a little antagonistic,


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
> >

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