xml-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From James Duncan Davidson <james.david...@eng.sun.com>
Subject Re: [spinnaker] Announce
Date Sat, 08 Jul 2000 22:10:51 GMT
on 7/8/00 10:56 AM, Arnaud Le Hors at lehors@us.ibm.com wrote:

> So far the only proof I've got is that Hotspot miserably fails on
> Xerces. This means to me that Hotspot has a problem, not xerces.

Many many many programs work better on Hotspot than not. And the Hotspot
team has been saying for *years* now (at least 3, more than half the
lifetime of Java) what kind of optimizations would crap on them. When I was
on the Java Web Server team, we hit almost every one. Cleaning up the code
reversed this treand and performance picked up. Sure, people are going to
get bit by this... Xerces wasn't the first, nor will it be the last.

> Not so. What you're refering to as "IBM Cupertino" is hardly a fixed set
> of people. We've actually had a lot of turnover and we keep getting new
> people involved in this project all the time. This hasn't prevented any
> of them to contribute significantly. The only reason most bits come from
> IBM is that nobody else has comitted as many resources to this project.

It's a center for development where everyone is getting paid to do work on
the same codebase, meeting in meeting rooms, and communicating with and
helping each other out in person. As efficient as this is for product work,
it's not condusive to building a truely sustainable Apache project.

> There definitely are choices that have been made that could be
> revisited. But you make it sound like we never took into account memory
> consumption. It is hardly the case. As you know there is always a
> trade-off between memory consumption and performance. You may have
> different requirements here, but they'd have to be laid out and agreed
> upon.

Ok, so I'm the bad guy because I didn't enunciate every possible motive. I
took a look at a relevant set. All of us that work on software know that
there are tradeoffs. But writing code for cutting edge VMs, the trade offs
are different and there are different advantages that can be put into play
that change the balance of the trade off. I want to take a look at what can
happen like that.

>> So, in the best of Apache traditions, were gonna do something about it. I'm
>> creating a tree in the xml-contrib area in which to do a lot of code work to
>> explore how such a new parser could come to be. It's called Spinnaker.
> Is it really in the Apache traditions to start new things like that over
> a week-end without having any discussion beforehand? Looking at Sun's
> record I guess I can see a trend for sure...

Bite me. This isn't about Sun vs. IBM. I'm here as an ASF member, developer,
and founder of a few other Apache codebases. I happen to work at Sun, yes.
I've brought out quite a bit of Sun code to Apache. But I am an ASF member
before being a Sun employee. I'm very unhappy that you've tried to play a
corporate piss match card here.

ASF developers check in code and send email around the clock from all over
the world. That's why we do this asynchronous email communication thing. And
sometimes it works better than other times. And I have to point out that the
first two comments here are from primary developers on a Saturday morning.

Yes, it's Apache tradition that when an itch wants to be scratched, it gets
scratched. Yes, entirely new source trees have been started up over less.
Software Diversity is a good thing. To assume that we already have the
perfect peice of software is arrogant, and sometimes the best way to find
out is to experiment  outside the confines of the current tree.

> These two requirements are in direct conflict.

I don't think so. But we'll find out. And we very well might hit a different
balance of things, or a better cleaner way to code it that will make a

>> So, to close a few thoughts...
>> Q. Isn't this a slam on the Xerces guys?
> I say yes. Looks like a "coup d'etat" to me.

<sigh>If that's the way you're going to take it, then I'm sorry for that.

Like I said, this is an experimental code base. It doesn't mean squat yet. I
may never mean squat. If you don't like it, don't participate. It's as
simple as that. 


View raw message