You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@harmony.apache.org by Gary Affonso <gl...@greywether.com> on 2005/05/20 20:45:18 UTC
Re: [arch] VM Candidate : JikesRVM
http://jikesrvm.sourceforge.net/
On 5/20/05 3:38 AM, "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On May 19, 2005, at 10:29 PM, Renaud BECHADE wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Another point that is unrelated, but what about the "packaging" of
>> the VM?
>> Do we plan to release it with say Eclipse + Server (JSF + IDE +
>> object DB or
>> O/R mapping + HSQL DB)? (IMHO this is good way to legitimate it)
>
> No. Why would we do this?
I could see why someone (at least myself) might tend to think in this
direction.
This project has been called "Harmony" and, well, there's a lot in the Java
world that could stand to be "Harmonized". The various ORM solutions, the
IDE's, the webapp frameworks, etc. Hell, a good chunk of the "disharmony"
with Java right now is serious rift between Sun, which pushes EJB, and the
"lightweight" folks who are seeing a shocking (and, IMO, deserved) amount of
success with creating and using an EJB alternative (Spring, Hibernate,
etc.).
I'm not saying I think this Harmony project should try to and harmonize any
of those thing. It's got its job cut out for it to "harmonize" the various
efforts around...
* a JVM
* a compiler
* a class library
...without thinking about the upper layers of the Java stack. I think the
scope of this effort is clear to those who are moderately "in the know".
But it's not a big surprise (at least to me) that when moderately "out of
the know" people hear "Java Harmony" they might think the effort extends
beyond just the core components. Indeed, they'll probably assume that it
addresses the aspects of Java that are, to many, are the most acrimonious to
begin with (EJB vs Lightweight or NetBeans/Swing vs Eclipse/SWT).
If nothing else, I'd suggest this be in a FAQ somewhere so that it's clear
that "Harmony" intends to address just a small subset of the java world, not
even the one that gets the most "acrimony" in the press and on blogs.
- Gary
Re: [arch] VM Candidate : JikesRVM http://jikesrvm.sourceforge.net/
Posted by Ahmed Saad <my...@gmail.com>.
hi all.. you know i think we all should work to bring the spirit of harmoney
to the open source movement in general... for example as a web developer i
read about a new php mvc-based framework every couple of days with really
nothing new to introduce to the scene.... so if all *similiar* open source
projects *harmonized* their efforts... i think we will be in a more
productive/innovative open source world... nevertheless, projects with
different philosophies about the same thing should just remain separate
trying to compete with each other....sorry for my off subject
On 5/20/05, crispyalien <cr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi, I just wanted to say that a free opensource VM with do a lot of
> harmonyzation in Java world. This is more or les the missing pice. There
> are some free java VMs but they will never be used in critical by the
> companys to run there applications if it won't be backed-up by a big
> (and well known for it's qality) company/fundation. I think Appache
> fundation cand be that sponsor. I also believe that Harmony should only
> be about VM+classpath. But I could also see the meaning in having a tool
> development pack. This could be done by some other project. Maybe
> Appache could take the lead here too but this is another story.
>
> best regards,
> Valentin
>
> Gary Affonso wrote:
>
> >On 5/20/05 3:38 AM, "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>On May 19, 2005, at 10:29 PM, Renaud BECHADE wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>>Another point that is unrelated, but what about the "packaging" of
> >>>the VM?
> >>>Do we plan to release it with say Eclipse + Server (JSF + IDE +
> >>>object DB or
> >>>O/R mapping + HSQL DB)? (IMHO this is good way to legitimate it)
> >>>
> >>>
> >>No. Why would we do this?
> >>
> >>
> >
> >I could see why someone (at least myself) might tend to think in this
> >direction.
> >
> >This project has been called "Harmony" and, well, there's a lot in the
> Java
> >world that could stand to be "Harmonized". The various ORM solutions, the
> >IDE's, the webapp frameworks, etc. Hell, a good chunk of the "disharmony"
> >with Java right now is serious rift between Sun, which pushes EJB, and
> the
> >"lightweight" folks who are seeing a shocking (and, IMO, deserved) amount
> of
> >success with creating and using an EJB alternative (Spring, Hibernate,
> >etc.).
> >
> >I'm not saying I think this Harmony project should try to and harmonize
> any
> >of those thing. It's got its job cut out for it to "harmonize" the
> various
> >efforts around...
> >
> > * a JVM
> > * a compiler
> > * a class library
> >
> >...without thinking about the upper layers of the Java stack. I think the
> >scope of this effort is clear to those who are moderately "in the know".
> >
> >But it's not a big surprise (at least to me) that when moderately "out of
> >the know" people hear "Java Harmony" they might think the effort extends
> >beyond just the core components. Indeed, they'll probably assume that it
> >addresses the aspects of Java that are, to many, are the most acrimonious
> to
> >begin with (EJB vs Lightweight or NetBeans/Swing vs Eclipse/SWT).
> >
> >If nothing else, I'd suggest this be in a FAQ somewhere so that it's
> clear
> >that "Harmony" intends to address just a small subset of the java world,
> not
> >even the one that gets the most "acrimony" in the press and on blogs.
> >
> >- Gary
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
Re: [arch] VM Candidate : JikesRVM
http://jikesrvm.sourceforge.net/
Posted by Gary Affonso <gl...@greywether.com>.
On 5/20/05 12:20 PM, "crispyalien" <cr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi, I just wanted to say that a free opensource VM with do a lot of
> harmonyzation in Java world.
I agree that it will be of great benefit. It's why I'm on this list, after
all.
I guess my point, though, is that this project doesn't "disharmonize" the
aspects of the Java world that (at least from where I sit) get the most
press.
> This is more or les the missing pice.
Yup, for a complete end-to-end OpenSource Java solution, it is the missing
piece. But the project isn't call "Missing Piece" it's called "Harmony" and
that's going to cause some confusion.
Just saying people shouldn't be surprised when questions like...
"will Harmony fix the <insert favorite Java disharmony>"?
...get asked.
> There
> are some free java VMs but they will never be used in critical by the
> companys to run there applications if it won't be backed-up by a big
> (and well known for it's qality) company/fundation. I think Appache
> fundation cand be that sponsor. I also believe that Harmony should only
> be about VM+classpath.
Me too. I'm *not* advocating for a change of scope. Harmony is what it is:
a project to create a standards compliant, OpenSource, Java compiler, JVM, a
class library. (If one wanted to blaspheme, one might be inclined to point
out that it's essentially the Java equivalent of Mono in terms of scope and
goals.)
Just pointing out that the project's name "Harmony" isn't particularly good
at indicating what that scope is. Indeed, it can be a bit misleading when
considering the other, high-visibility, areas within Java where "disharmony"
exists.
- Gary
Re: [arch] VM Candidate : JikesRVM http://jikesrvm.sourceforge.net/
Posted by crispyalien <cr...@gmail.com>.
Hi, I just wanted to say that a free opensource VM with do a lot of
harmonyzation in Java world. This is more or les the missing pice. There
are some free java VMs but they will never be used in critical by the
companys to run there applications if it won't be backed-up by a big
(and well known for it's qality) company/fundation. I think Appache
fundation cand be that sponsor. I also believe that Harmony should only
be about VM+classpath. But I could also see the meaning in having a tool
development pack. This could be done by some other project. Maybe
Appache could take the lead here too but this is another story.
best regards,
Valentin
Gary Affonso wrote:
>On 5/20/05 3:38 AM, "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
>
>>On May 19, 2005, at 10:29 PM, Renaud BECHADE wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Another point that is unrelated, but what about the "packaging" of
>>>the VM?
>>>Do we plan to release it with say Eclipse + Server (JSF + IDE +
>>>object DB or
>>>O/R mapping + HSQL DB)? (IMHO this is good way to legitimate it)
>>>
>>>
>>No. Why would we do this?
>>
>>
>
>I could see why someone (at least myself) might tend to think in this
>direction.
>
>This project has been called "Harmony" and, well, there's a lot in the Java
>world that could stand to be "Harmonized". The various ORM solutions, the
>IDE's, the webapp frameworks, etc. Hell, a good chunk of the "disharmony"
>with Java right now is serious rift between Sun, which pushes EJB, and the
>"lightweight" folks who are seeing a shocking (and, IMO, deserved) amount of
>success with creating and using an EJB alternative (Spring, Hibernate,
>etc.).
>
>I'm not saying I think this Harmony project should try to and harmonize any
>of those thing. It's got its job cut out for it to "harmonize" the various
>efforts around...
>
> * a JVM
> * a compiler
> * a class library
>
>...without thinking about the upper layers of the Java stack. I think the
>scope of this effort is clear to those who are moderately "in the know".
>
>But it's not a big surprise (at least to me) that when moderately "out of
>the know" people hear "Java Harmony" they might think the effort extends
>beyond just the core components. Indeed, they'll probably assume that it
>addresses the aspects of Java that are, to many, are the most acrimonious to
>begin with (EJB vs Lightweight or NetBeans/Swing vs Eclipse/SWT).
>
>If nothing else, I'd suggest this be in a FAQ somewhere so that it's clear
>that "Harmony" intends to address just a small subset of the java world, not
>even the one that gets the most "acrimony" in the press and on blogs.
>
>- Gary
>
>
>
>
RE: [arch] VM Candidate : JikesRVMhttp://jikesrvm.sourceforge.net/
Posted by Renaud BECHADE <re...@numerix.com>.
＞If nothing else, I'd suggest this be in a FAQ somewhere so that it's clear
＞that "Harmony" intends to address just a small subset of the java world,
not
＞even the one that gets the most "acrimony" in the press and on blogs.
Including a good report on how well these work with the VM /NOW/.
(conceptually everything should work, but practically...)
-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Affonso [mailto:glists@greywether.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2005 3:45 AM
To: harmony-dev@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: [arch] VM Candidate : JikesRVMhttp://jikesrvm.sourceforge.net/
On 5/20/05 3:38 AM, "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On May 19, 2005, at 10:29 PM, Renaud BECHADE wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Another point that is unrelated, but what about the "packaging" of
>> the VM?
>> Do we plan to release it with say Eclipse + Server (JSF + IDE +
>> object DB or
>> O/R mapping + HSQL DB)? (IMHO this is good way to legitimate it)
>
> No. Why would we do this?
I could see why someone (at least myself) might tend to think in this
direction.
This project has been called "Harmony" and, well, there's a lot in the Java
world that could stand to be "Harmonized". The various ORM solutions, the
IDE's, the webapp frameworks, etc. Hell, a good chunk of the "disharmony"
with Java right now is serious rift between Sun, which pushes EJB, and the
"lightweight" folks who are seeing a shocking (and, IMO, deserved) amount of
success with creating and using an EJB alternative (Spring, Hibernate,
etc.).
I'm not saying I think this Harmony project should try to and harmonize any
of those thing. It's got its job cut out for it to "harmonize" the various
efforts around...
* a JVM
* a compiler
* a class library
...without thinking about the upper layers of the Java stack. I think the
scope of this effort is clear to those who are moderately "in the know".
But it's not a big surprise (at least to me) that when moderately "out of
the know" people hear "Java Harmony" they might think the effort extends
beyond just the core components. Indeed, they'll probably assume that it
addresses the aspects of Java that are, to many, are the most acrimonious to
begin with (EJB vs Lightweight or NetBeans/Swing vs Eclipse/SWT).
If nothing else, I'd suggest this be in a FAQ somewhere so that it's clear
that "Harmony" intends to address just a small subset of the java world, not
even the one that gets the most "acrimony" in the press and on blogs.
- Gary