[IMMINENT RELEASE] 1.10.1

[Matthias Klose]

On 24.03.2011 15:23, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
> On 13:14 Thu 24 Mar     , Matthias Klose wrote:
>> On 23.03.2011 17:08, Dr Andrew John Hughes wrote:
>>> I'd like to release 1.10.1 on Wednesday the 30th of March at 14h00 UTC.
>>
>> We do want to have some time for testing. Not all proposed changes are found in
>> the branch yet, so I really would like to see these changes in the branch, and
>> *then* have a week for testing. Assuming that the changes are checked in today
>> or tomorrow, please don't release before Mar 31 or Apr 1 (no April joke).
>>
> 
> Ok, let's make it the same time on Monday the 4th of April.  I'm not around on
> the 1st, and even if there is a release on the 31st there may be issues.
> 
>>> other additions?
>>
>> yes, testing, and documentation of testing.  With the latest security fixes and
>> the non-default hotspot came some regressions.  If not fixed, these should be at
>> least documented.
> 
> Well, the branch is there to test.

then please check in changes which are targeted for the release.

> If things need to be documented, we can review
> patches for README or INSTALL as suitable.

The master overview should be in some place which can be edited after the
release too, e.g. the wiki.  README and INSTALL should just point to it.

> Can you elaborate on these regressions?  I thought they'd all been resolved before
> the release of 1.10.

jdk tests hang with hotspot hs20, at least with zero/shark builds. I would be
interested if these hang on x86 on other platforms too.

>> If testing reveals regressions, do we consider these as release blockers, and if
>> yes, for which configurations?
> 
> Has to be on a case-by-case basis.

So who makes this decision?

>> For the documentation of the tests, maybe have a wiki page for each release
>> branch with a matrix architecture/VM, and the cells mentioning the last version
>> tested on this branch.  Then at least it's visible which configurations did see
>> some attention.
>>
>> Which VM's to test?
>>
>>  - default hotspot on x86
>>
>> should be required for x86 and x86_64, regressions should be release blockers.
>>
>>  - zero on x86? ARM? powerpc?
>>  - shark?
>>  - optional hotspot on x86?
>>
>> I assume these could be tested without too much trouble, and even running the
>> jdk tests for a subset of these should be possible.
>>
>>  - JamVM?
>>  - CACAO?
>>
>> Optional, but would be good to know that a certain configuration is tested.
>>
> 
> Well, a lot of this depends on what hardware people have available, though mjw's
> builders can help with that.  For instance, I only regularly build on x86_64 as
> that's the main hardware I have available.  I can build on ppc if there's a need.
> I simply don't have x86 hardware any more.

Lack of x86 hardware is not an argument. Depending on the distribution you use
you should be able to build x86 on x86_64 out of the box, or you could use a chroot.

> I usually just do a default build
> (configure plus zip locations) with an additional alt-HotSpot build if the change
> affects HotSpot code.
> 
> For Zero, Shark, CACAO, JamVM, and the ARM port, I rely on people who care about
> these to maintain them.  For major releases, I try to build them, and AFAIK they
> were all working for 1.10.  For CACAO and JamVM, Xerxes certainly seems to have 
> given them a lot of love and I trust him on this.  I have no clue what's going
> on with the ARM port and, as I've posted twice before, it will be dropped with
> 1.11 unless the situation changes.

I'll send a followup until end of May. For now, you could just disable it
without dropping it.

  Matthias