Mailing-List: contact dev-help@river.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@river.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of jpratt3000@gmail.com designates
 209.85.160.43 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        b=NtSBBSvQxJ2xA4pDcYng/GLx2pFDz931W4rALLVrgcHHRQ5inLka5r1Nwjeq80MsCo
         InxCadJpC6ke3TBvQhSM6csEhIgQPTLCHu6pXn/G4mDpxxAP9jeQDuydee6kRmeg7IIO
         VozQnCjyyoJm1BFAnif502WvsJ2zo2Zu/avy8=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimqdtBbFuQTE51SHJPCkZKR=rS-P2SpMdoTCQd=@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTi=Lj_W4u5WdEYwnjpbLnYuuGAxFSL4xkYkcEwxA@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=5nesXBwRSh_peQkMof-tF-4GXe8Ed6-e+DshS@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D924F39.3010002@acm.org>
	<AANLkTi=LoZprvupooHL+GF33pyq_f5g0hYTHb3_=JW8X@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTik680EvGc2B0m74yVRdEU_zOfuK=srqdWa2NKns@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikqbtdBq+Db28fX1ZhmAYr784M8nkK-+XrEH+1J@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D952191.4070609@acm.org>
	<AANLkTi=6dZdhvDsdd+ut4pfMU4EcAHqd2mUNU6s=tRXJ@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTimqdtBbFuQTE51SHJPCkZKR=rS-P2SpMdoTCQd=@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2011 08:27:03 +1300
Message-ID: <AANLkTik=p96QrK_vVEDX8cK7sh4uaG-B+jD+U7c3SW7U@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Remaining Work For Next Release
From: Jason Pratt <jpratt3000@gmail.com>
To: dev@river.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=000e0cd151780a5228049fe06577

--000e0cd151780a5228049fe06577
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

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
support sparc or whatever other platform you in your infinite wisdom deem
irrelevant , great. river should have one release it can point at for anyone
wanting to try/use it.

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?

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
> > >
> >
>

--000e0cd151780a5228049fe06577--