[Fwd: Re: patchset 2 report (billh's resignation)]

[Fwd: Re: patchset 2 report (billh's resignation)]

Post by Marc van Kemp » Fri, 07 Feb 2003 22:00:28



This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------020506050609020908010609
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


up twice, apologies.

--
----------------------------------------------------
Marc van Kempen               tel. +31 40 2 64 98 60
BowTie Technology             fax. +31 40 2 64 98 61

5611 CH  Eindhoven              http://www.bowtie.nl
----------------------------------------------------

--------------020506050609020908010609
Content-Type: message/rfc822;
 name="Re: patchset 2 report (billh's resignation)"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline;
 filename="Re: patchset 2 report (billh's resignation)"

X-Sieve: cmu-sieve 1.3

Received: from euripides.intra.bowtie.nl (euripides.intra.bowtie.nl [192.168.4.15])
        by bowtie.nl (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id h16B5Gg16405;
        Thu, 6 Feb 2003 12:05:16 +0100 (CET)

Received: from euripides.intra.bowtie.nl (localhost.intra.bowtie.nl [127.0.0.1])
        by euripides.intra.bowtie.nl (8.12.5/8.12.5) with ESMTP id h16B5F6W079836;
        Thu, 6 Feb 2003 12:05:15 +0100 (CET)


        by euripides.intra.bowtie.nl (8.12.5/8.12.5/Submit) id h16B5Ew0079834;
        Thu, 6 Feb 2003 12:05:14 +0100 (CET)
Date: Thu, 6 Feb 2003 12:05:13 +0100





Subject: Re: patchset 2 report (billh's resignation)



Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline

User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.22.1i


Quote:> John;

> Thankyou so much for taking the time to summarize the discussion between you
> and bill.

[ John's explanation cut ]

I feel that I must step up and defend Bill here. While I don't necessarily agree
with his liberal use of abusive language, I do feel that we wouldn't be having
a working hotspot compiler if it weren't for Bill. Judging from his postings to
this mailling list (which anyone can look up), he must have been pretty frustrated
with the slow progress and bugs in the FreeBSD threading system that he had to
work around / solve at the same time. And while I can't judge Bill's technical
ability, I do know that for a long time he was the only one working on it, he
has certainly done the most unpleasant labour, but he persisted and now the
java port seems to have reached a state where real progress can be made.

But Bill has laid the foundation for that!

If I were to judge Bill's character from his postings here, I would have to say
that it seems somewhat volatile, but his enthusiasm and perseverance are also
very strong traits, and he shouldn't be dismissed because of his strong reaction,
as some posters (without a clue to what he did) seem to do.

I can't really blame him for reacting (maybe not this strongly) this way, but
the way John has handled this was very poor, and I'm in complete agreement
with John Utz here.

Come on John (Polstra), just give the guy credit for what he has done, and
admit you should have consulted with him at the least.

Also let's have a discussion over what went wrong here and what we can do to
improve future situations.

That way Bill can put his nuclear flamethrower away, and he can just go back to
hacking, and we can all stomp on the jdk 1.4 / 1.3 to get it to production
quality, something everyone here wants!

Regards,
Marc.

PS. Bill, if John does as I suggest you might consider apologing for your
overly abusive language. You overdid it a bit. You seem to have enough
sympathy from the lurkers here, you don't need the strong language.

--------------020506050609020908010609--


with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message

 
 
 

1. patchset 2 report (billh's resignation)

Alexey,

Thanks much for your comment, which wiped my doubt out.


Now, I see that, in addition to Greg, you are also allowed to access
TCK.  That is a very good news because TCK has been one of the
toughest barriers between the forthcoming binary releases and us.

Can anyone estimate how long does it take to pass TCK for 1.4.X?
(How long time do you and the Foundation expect to have a binary release?)

It is hard to believe for me 1.4.X can pass TCK soon (in a week or a
month) because I have seen the cases of Linux and FreeBSD.
Blackdown Java Linux porting team needed three month or more from the
acquisition of TCK to release a binary of JDK 1.2.
It took a little longer than a year to pass TCK for FreeBSD 1.3.1.
In those cases the JVM was Classic VM.  This time the target is
HotSpot VM, which loads more burdens on OS and core libraries like
threads.

I myself have a little experience on TCK.  In 1999, Someone has
applied JCK (now known as TCK) to the JIT compiler I have been
developping.  A few hundreds of tests failed even though I noticed no
bug of the JIT.  I was very surprised (though one bug can causes much
failure).  This experience gave me an impression of TCK, that is
substantial and tough.



with "unsubscribe freebsd-java" in the body of the message

2. Digi PC/Xem Supported?

3. patchset 2 report (a love story)

4. Now why did I post that (that troll)?

5. OT: Patchset website (was: Re: 1.3.1 patchset 8)

6. DHCP Client

7. Need help for 'ipfw' with 'fwd' option

8. advice needed on partitioning

9. Netatalk: 'afpd' reports unresolved symbol '__xstat'

10. 2.4.14-pre8: 'free' still reports bogus 'cached' value.

11. report unknown NMI reasons only once (fwd)

12. Sun Microsystems Reports All Time Record First Quarter Results (fwd)

13. 2.5 Problem Report Status (fwd)