[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [technology-pmc] Eclipse OMR project's product is "source code"
|
Mark,
Thanks for sharing. I actually don't find it weird. Given the domain your project operates in, I understand that there is little value without an actual runtime - which is outside the scope of the project.
I think it's potentially weird to talk about "pull in" - which is probably a full clone. My concern here would be that this makes it easy to fork a project "internally". Thus, having libraries that projects must link against might raise the bar for creating an internal fork. But as long as your are aware of it and not too concerned about it then I'm happy with it I'm too.
-Gunnar
--
Gunnar Wagenknecht
gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, http://guw.io/
> Am 21.03.2016 um 20:03 schrieb Mark Stoodley <mstoodle@xxxxxxxxxx>:
>
> Making the technology-pmc group aware of this discussion, as requested by Wayne.
>
> Wayne's motivation: "It's a little weird (for us) that a project not produce a binary, so I'd like the PMC to be aware of the nature of the project and have a chance to discuss it."
>
> Gist is in this comment:
> On 18/03/16 02:08 PM, Mark Stoodley wrote:
> It does build: we designed a standalone binary build that can be created and tested (make && make test). But the resulting binaries are simply tests for the various core components. So those could be considered "exemplary" implementations but they aren't really very useful other than as tests. No other project, for example, would want those binaries for any purpose that I can (naively?) imagine.
>
> The project is designed to be absorbed as source code components into other language runtimes for them to build. We're working with the Ruby community right now to create a pull request against CRuby to bring in parts of the OMR project. IBM will be pulling the OMR code base in on every accepted merge request to build our J9 JVM as well as some of the experimental projects we're working on for other runtimes.
>
> Of course, that's only the way it works for the components that are currently in OMR.
>
> It's possible that future components may be distributable in binary form, so we may have to revisit this model at some point.
>
> But for now, our "product" is source code.
>
> Basically, OMR is a platform and so it doesn't do anything by itself.
>
> Some of these tests are pretty straight-forward examples of how to use the facilities in the project (for example, the thread and port libraries). The GC tests also show how to bootstrap, exercise, and shutdown the GC component.
>
> So they could be considered "exemplary" implementations. But as binaries, they are not really very useful for anyone to consume other than to show that the test code does run and works on different platforms. No one would use those binaries to actually do anything.
>
> Questions welcome.
> Mark Stoodley 8200 Warden Avenue
> <Mail-Anhang.gif>
> Senior Software Developer Markham, L6G 1C7
> IBM Runtime Technologies Canada
> Phone: +1-905-413-5831
> e-mail: mstoodle@xxxxxxxxxx
> We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them - Albert Einstein
>
>
>
>
>
> ----- Forwarded by Mark Stoodley/Toronto/IBM on 2016/03/21 02:52 PM -----
>
> From: Wayne Beaton <emo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Mark Stoodley/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
> Cc: Dorra Bouchiha/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA, Gary Liu/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA, Irina Rada/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA, Gunnar Wagenknecht <gunnar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, David M Williams <david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>, Mike Wilson/Ottawa/IBM@IBMCA
> Date: 2016/03/21 02:00 PM
> Subject: Re: Fw: The Eclipse technology.omr project is complete!
>
>
>
> Hi Mark.
>
> I would like to involve the Technology PMC in this discussion. In fact, I'd prefer that you move it to the technology-pmc@eclipse.orgmailing list.
>
> It's a little weird (for us) that a project not produce a binary, so I'd like the PMC to be aware of the nature of the project and have a chance to discuss it.
>
> I've copied Gunnar Wagenknecht, the PMC lead as an FYI.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Wayne
>
> On 18/03/16 02:08 PM, Mark Stoodley wrote:
> It does build: we designed a standalone binary build that can be created and tested (make && make test). But the resulting binaries are simply tests for the various core components. So those could be considered "exemplary" implementations but they aren't really very useful other than as tests. No other project, for example, would want those binaries for any purpose that I can (naively?) imagine.
>
> The project is designed to be absorbed as source code components into other language runtimes for them to build. We're working with the Ruby community right now to create a pull request against CRuby to bring in parts of the OMR project. IBM will be pulling the OMR code base in on every accepted merge request to build our J9 JVM as well as some of the experimental projects we're working on for other runtimes.
>
> Of course, that's only the way it works for the components that are currently in OMR.
>
> It's possible that future components may be distributable in binary form, so we may have to revisit this model at some point.
>
> But for now, our "product" is source code.
> Mark Stoodley 8200 Warden Avenue
> <Mail-Anhang.gif>
> Senior Software Developer Markham, L6G 1C7
> IBM Runtime Technologies Canada
> Phone: +1-905-413-5831
> e-mail: mstoodle@xxxxxxxxxx
> We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them - Albert Einstein
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> From: Wayne Beaton <emo@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: Mark Stoodley/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
> Cc: Dorra Bouchiha/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA, Gary Liu/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA, Irina Rada/Toronto/IBM@IBMCA
> Date: 2016/03/18 01:41 PM
> Subject: Re: Fw: The Eclipse technology.omr project is complete!
>
>
>
> We don't put any restrictions on how you build project code. We do, however, require that project code be buildable (i.e. a mere mortal should be able to pick up and build your code).
>
> I'm curious... if you're not producing a binary release, what are you building?
>
> Is there no opportunity for an exemplary product from this project?
>
> Wayne
>
> On 18/03/16 01:34 PM, Mark Stoodley wrote:
> Hi Wayne,
>
> Another question: there is interest within the OMR community to leverage Travis-CI for builds. Given the OMR project does not actually produce a binary release (just source drops), is there any reason we shouldn't or can't use Travis-CI ?
> Mark Stoodley 8200 Warden Avenue
> <Mail-Anhang.gif>
> Senior Software Developer Markham, L6G 1C7
> IBM Runtime Technologies Canada
> Phone: +1-905-413-5831
> e-mail: mstoodle@xxxxxxxxxx
> We cannot solve our problems with the same thinking we used when we created them - Albert Einstein
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Wayne Beaton on behalf of the Eclipse Management Organization
> @waynebeaton
> The Eclipse Foundation
> <Mail-Anhang.jpeg>
>
> _______________________________________________
> technology-pmc mailing list
> technology-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
> To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
> https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/technology-pmc
