[Pharo-users] Why doesn't Iceberg checkin other assets (scripts) but does check them out?

Guillermo Polito guillermopolito at gmail.com
Thu Jun 14 04:12:18 EDT 2018


Just to complement Esteban's answer:

- Iceberg checks out in disk more than the src directory because you
**may** want to edit files from the command line, and after long
discussions we did not want to forbid that.
Actually, just to put everybody in perspective, at first the idea was to
not have a working copy in disk at all, but just hit to the blob.
Imagine is nowadays we are a bit alien, that would have been worst :)

- About checking in files. I'd like to understand what you mean exactly.
  - Do you want to load them into memory?
    This would be the "more consistent" way to do it, following the "the
image it its own working copy" metaphore.
    This would allow us to, for example, share an image and transparently
share resources with it (without requiring to clone).
    But this would have some impact in memory consumption and add stress to
the GC, right?

  - Or do you mean to ask like any other Git client and show you the file
differences between the working copy and the git index?
    The problem with this approach is that we will have some treatment for
pharo code and some different treatment for non-code...
    If I do a change to a class, the change is kept in the image. But if I
do a change to a file, that change is not kept in the image!

Also, as Esteban says, having an IDE with support for files would mean that
we would need good tools to edit in-memory files (not only text files,
right? but also any kind of binary file...)

So far we cover the bare minimum that allows us to *not lose* changes :)

On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 11:07 PM Tim Mackinnon <tim at testit.works> wrote:

>
> > yeah… but is a lot of work and no time just right now.
> > long term, it would be cool to manage everything from iceberg.
> > but reality check, is a huge amount of work so it has to come step by
> step.
>
> Fair enough - its pretty cool we’ve got this far, and I guess the onus is
> on the rest of us to learn more about how its done and see if we can
> contribute more somehow. I really appreciate the love you’ve already put
> into this - it works far better than I think we even realised it could.
>
> Tim
>
>
>
> > On 13 Jun 2018, at 21:55, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >> On 13 Jun 2018, at 22:44, Tim Mackinnon <tim at testit.works> wrote:
> >>
> >> Esteban - so I don't then understand why iceberg (usefully in my view)
> checks out more than the src directory, if it’s only focusing on the Pharo
> blob?
> >>
> >> I’m guessing that by knowing where the src is, you are just committing
> that part of the tree with libgit?
> >>
> >> Perhaps from a pragmatic first step you might consider letting us add a
> second safe resources directory that you could check in atomically as well
> (on the understanding all bets are off if it goes wrong?)
> >>
> >> OR could we have a check in mode does all the add/remove operations and
> writes to disk but then let’s you drop to the command line/other tool to
> add any other files and do the final commit?
> >>
> >> I just feel like you/we are so close to something that works a bit more
> broadly and embrace the wider world.?
> >
> > yeah… but is a lot of work and no time just right now.
> > long term, it would be cool to manage everything from iceberg.
> > but reality check, is a huge amount of work so it has to come step by
> step.
> >
> >>
> >> Tim
> >>
> >> Sent from my iPhone
> >>
> >>> On 13 Jun 2018, at 21:28, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> hi,
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> On 13 Jun 2018, at 16:50, Tim Mackinnon <tim at testit.works> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Hi - my second attempt at using Pharo with Git has proven very
> satisfying (I saw the potential in phase 1, but it was often difficult to
> understand what was happening and the workflow to use).
> >>>>
> >>>> One thing that has come up a few times for me however - and its
> something that using git nicely highlights, there are many non-smalltalk
> assets in my project that don’t need to live in the image (like Seaside
> FileLibraries were trying to do) but do need to be versioned and be part of
> my project. Common examples are server config files, images and even the
> playground history files that are useful to pull up when on another
> computer.
> >>>>
> >>>> It seems that while Iceberg does check out a full project, if I
> change any of the files outside of the src directory (like edit a .txt file
> using the crude Pharo file editor), those changes don’t get committed when
> I do a checkin? Is this on purpose? It makes the workflow a bit trickier to
> do an atomic commit of a piece of work - and I’m not clear whether this is
> a conscious thing, or an MVP thing (and it will come later).
> >>>
> >>> workflow is tricker because you are expecting iceberg to talk with the
> local working copy and to handle that WC.
> >>> what happens in fact is different: iceberg treats the image as a
> working copy itself (it has its own “stage” area) and what you have in disk
> is like a separated WC.
> >>>
> >>> at least, this is the metaphor we are using now, because we cannot
> realistically handle/control what is in disk since it can be anything.
> >>> So, instead having this picture in mind:
> >>>
> >>> Image -> Disk -> Git blob (database)
> >>>
> >>> you need to have this other:
> >>>
> >>> Image \
> >>>      Git blob (database)
> >>> Disk    /
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> you will see as soon as you change the mental image, your problems are
> gone ;)
> >>>
> >>> cheers!
> >>> Esteban
> >>>
> >>> ps: diagram before is not exactly as it is since the image actually
> writes into disk first, but this is an implementation detail we would like
> to remove in the future, even.
> >>>
> >>>>
> >>>> As mentioned above, I was also thinking it would be nice if I could
> checkin some of the play-xxxx/*.sh files to essentially keep some of that
> history synced between environments (or team members?).
> >>>>
> >>>> It strikes me that this is the kind of thing that git integration
> should bring to us?
> >>>>
> >>>> I can overlay my copy of IntelliJ on top of my local iceberg
> directory and then use it for checkins - but then I still have the atomic
> problem, as its only when I commit that tonel files are written out onto
> the file system for me to checkin along with any other assets I’ve changed.
> Does anyone else have a good workflow for this? What do you guys do?
> >>>>
> >>>> Tim
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
>
>
>

-- 



Guille Polito

Research Engineer

Centre de Recherche en Informatique, Signal et Automatique de Lille

CRIStAL - UMR 9189

French National Center for Scientific Research - *http://www.cnrs.fr
<http://www.cnrs.fr>*


*Web:* *http://guillep.github.io* <http://guillep.github.io>

*Phone: *+33 06 52 70 66 13
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-users_lists.pharo.org/attachments/20180614/f3684cd9/attachment.html>


More information about the Pharo-users mailing list