[Pharo-dev] A thought about backporting

Igor Stasenko siguctua at gmail.com
Fri Nov 15 10:36:20 EST 2013

On 15 November 2013 14:31, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2013-11-15, at 14:26, Stephan Eggermont <stephan at stack.nl> wrote:
> > btc wrote:
> > >OMG! I only just noticed on the "RELEASE" page [1] the linked file
> "Pharo2.0-win.zip" [3] >has a last-modified-date of 2013-11-13.  What crack
> [2] are you smoking?  A "released" >file with a name like
> "Pharo2.0-win.zip" should NEVER change its contents.  NEVER!  It >SHOULD
> always remain the same - always - to the end of time! Backports are really
> >important but they should be labelled as a new version "release" or just
> as "latest" if >regularly uploaded from the CI.
> >
> > No. Releases on the website are for humans, not for automation. They
> should work and have all the latest backported bugfixes. Fixed versions for
> automation and sysadmins  have build numbers. We have this covered with
> files.pharo.org
> I agree

from perspective of automation i also completely agree with Stephan.
Just thought about it, what urls i used for downloads of other projects,
and found it is usually bad idea to pick a download url from front page to
build the rest of process on top of it.
Because sites often changing, means urls as well.. or people adding
registration/pay walls etc..
while if you using urls pointing to archive, it is meant to be non-changing
over longer time period (possibly forever).

Best regards,
Igor Stasenko.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-dev_lists.pharo.org/attachments/20131115/97494d61/attachment-0002.html>

More information about the Pharo-dev mailing list