[rvm-core] Aiming for a 3.0 release sooner

[Ian Rogers]

Hi,

looking at the trackers, the issues that are scheduled for 3.0 don't
particularly seem critical - RVM-292 stands out to me. The issues for
2.9.4 are much more important. I'd suggest we change the numbering so
that 2.9.4 becomes the 3.0.0 release and 3.0 becomes the 3.0.1 release.
I'd like to get passed the version 3 milestone as my belief was 2.9 was
just a stop gap whilst we focussed particularly on the new build system
and switching over to Java 5 features (things that have been stable for
a while now).

Regards,
Ian

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Jikesrvm-core mailing list
Jikesrvm-core@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jikesrvm-core

[David P Grove]

>
> looking at the trackers, the issues that are scheduled for 3.0 don't
> particularly seem critical - RVM-292 stands out to me. The issues for
> 2.9.4 are much more important. I'd suggest we change the numbering so
> that 2.9.4 becomes the 3.0.0 release and 3.0 becomes the 3.0.1 release.
> I'd like to get passed the version 3 milestone as my belief was 2.9 was
> just a stop gap whilst we focussed particularly on the new build system
> and switching over to Java 5 features (things that have been stable for
> a while now).

      The one "must do" item remaining for 3.0 beyond the obvious
stability, etc. requirements that I think are mostly attached to 2.9.4
release target in JIRA right now is the massive renaming to get rid of the
VM_ prefix.  Part of the statement of 3.0 is that we are "done" (more or
less) with the wave of restructuring that we've been doing for the last 15
months and people can expect more stability in how the code is put
together.
      My outlook on this is that I'm hoping to be done by early next week
unless there is an unexpected disaster.

      The other "really nice to have" item would be to shoot the remaining
issues with running SPECjvm2008.  I don't see this as necessarily blocking
3.0, but being able to run this benchmark suite and the updated DaCapo
suite are important milestones for the project and should be focus items
for us.

      I'd prefer to leave the fix target numbering in JIRA along for now,
but proceed with the understanding that we're shooting for a 3.0 release by
the end of June and there is unlikely to be a 2.9.4 release between then
and now (the one exception would be if we nailed SPECjvm2008 problems by
early June, then a 2.9.4 might come out immediately to be followed by a 3.0
a few weeks later).  I'd really like to be able to say that we ran
SPECjvm2008 when we are talking to people at ISMM/PLDI in two weeks...

--dave


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.net email is sponsored by: Microsoft
Defy all challenges. Microsoft(R) Visual Studio 2008.
http://clk.atdmt.com/MRT/go/vse0120000070mrt/direct/01/
_______________________________________________
Jikesrvm-core mailing list
Jikesrvm-core@...
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/jikesrvm-core