RE: [arch] VM Candidate : JikesRVMhttp://jikesrvm.sourceforge.net/

[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