January 2011 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-project] next steps for pharo.

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

On Jan 3, 2011, at 7:28 PM, csrabak(a)bol.com.br wrote: > Em 03/01/2011 15:01, StÃ©phane Ducasse < stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr > escreveu: > >> Hi guys >> I'm brainstorming on what should be our next important actions. My >> gut feeling is that I would love >> - to get more class comments and documentation. > > I'm all for it. We need to increase the actual and perceived quality > of our work. > >> - get a list of working packages for development expanding the list > of packages available from: > http://book.pharo-project.org/book/PharoTools > >> - get metacello repositories up and running and start to get >> certified packages. > > I'm not keeping up with the overwhelming stream of messages in this > list and probably may be missing the kernel of it, but just in case: > do we have already a certification process for packages? no and now that hudson is working I would like to see what we can do especially with metacello - loading ok - % comment of - % of red tests >> How can we all make sure that this happens? > > All of it, it depends on the time frame ;-) IMHO I think priority zero > is class comments and documentation and second the certification > process. > > Attempting to answer the "how" part of the question, I surmise we will > keep the discussion on the comments and documentation in the next IRC > meeting? Yes > I see this as THE most important 'cultural' change we all need to undergo > because of all collaborations we can envisage, writing documentation (or > comments) for someone else code is the less efficient way of doing it. > > Perhaps some form of 'pair commenting' via Skype/IM or IRC _before_ the code > is uploaded? I do not know. Now I try to systematically write comments. I would like to take some example like the soup package and see how it goes. Stef > > > My 0.019999 > > -- > Cesar Rabak >

Jan. 3, 2011

[Pharo-project] next steps for pharo

by Torsten Bergmann

I think we can could/should not really force people to it but at least work on this and add support for cleaning. For instance blocking the Monticello upload in 1.3 if a package does not follow certain criterias would not be a good idea! We want to continue accepting solutions even if they are not 100% (since the definition of 100% sometimes depends on the POV and we may end up with code Bureaucracy and maybe less developers). Pharo should continue to be fun but we want more discipline. IMHO we should: 1. do it step by step by more repacking and documenting (see the already repackaged announcements and regex, Sunit will follow with issue 3445) => we need cleaned exemplary packages so people are able to follow the patterns 2. Define lint checks and make them instantly available via browser tools. Maybe you know the VisualWorks browser where you have the checks in a tab beside the code pane where one could instantly check and see problems in code. Eclipse has that too with Checkstyle/"the Problem view". I would like to see that in standard browser. 3. Define minimum criterias a core/dev package must have to be part of the system (unloadable, cleaned up dependency, class comments, have tests, ...) 4. Give a visual feedback (icon) if the package is not "clean", so people get a bad feeling when they see this on their packages and work towards cleaning. We can also have a package ranking ("the most clean" or "package of the month", ... ;) Just $0.02 Bye T. -- GMX DSL Doppel-Flat ab 19,99 Euro/mtl.! Jetzt mit gratis Handy-Flat! http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/dsl

Jan. 3, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] next steps for pharo.

by csrabak＠bol.com.br

Em 03/01/2011 15:01, StÃ©phane Ducasse < stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr > escreveu: > Hi guys > I'm brainstorming on what should be our next important actions. My > gut feeling is that I would love > - to get more class comments and documentation. I'm all for it. We need to increase the actual and perceived quality of our work. > - get a list of working packages for development expanding the list of packages available from: http://book.pharo-project.org/book/PharoTools > - get metacello repositories up and running and start to get > certified packages. I'm not keeping up with the overwhelming stream of messages in this list and probably may be missing the kernel of it, but just in case: do we have already a certification process for packages? > How can we all make sure that this happens? All of it, it depends on the time frame ;-) IMHO I think priority zero is class comments and documentation and second the certification process. Attempting to answer the "how" part of the question, I surmise we will keep the discussion on the comments and documentation in the next IRC meeting? I see this as THE most important 'cultural' change we all need to undergo because of all collaborations we can envisage, writing documentation (or comments) for someone else code is the less efficient way of doing it. Perhaps some form of 'pair commenting' via Skype/IM or IRC _before_ the code is uploaded? My 0.019999 -- Cesar Rabak

Jan. 3, 2011

[Pharo-project] next steps for pharo.

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

Hi guys I'm brainstorming on what should be our next important actions. My gut feeling is that I would love - to get more class comments and documentation. - get a list of working packages for development expanding the list of packages available from: http://book.pharo-project.org/book/PharoTools - get metacello repositories up and running and start to get certified packages. How can we all make sure that this happens? Stef

Jan. 3, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Crash on saving with Monticello

by David T. Lewis

On Mon, Jan 03, 2011 at 03:57:07PM +0100, Philippe Marschall wrote: > On 01/03/2011 03:25 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote: > > Hi! > > > > Sorry for the late answer. The student is now in my office and there is indeed a problem. > > UUIDPlugin is not present on his harddisk. Maybe built in the VM. > > > > I found the class UUID and remove the call to the primitive. It works. Strange problem. Shall I report it in codegoogle? > > Has been known for two years, shouldn't happen, nobody cares. > Huh ?!?!? What do you mean "nobody cares"? We are apparently now facing two *different* bugs in two different sets of Linux distributions. It's documented here: http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=7358 The only solution I can suggest is to get rid of the UUIDPlugin on unix VMs until the various Linux distros get this fixed. If anyone has a better solution *please* speak up. If you don't know how to fix it, well join the club but don't say that nobody cares. Dave

Jan. 3, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Crash on saving with Monticello

by Alexandre Bergel

>> I found the class UUID and remove the call to the primitive. It works. Strange problem. Shall I report it in codegoogle? > > Has been known for two years, shouldn't happen, nobody cares. One student of mine works with Ubuntu and the last Pharo 1.2 one click image, and he does care. He couldn't do a save in Monticello before I remove the call to the primitive. Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

Jan. 3, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Crash on saving with Monticello

by Philippe Marschall

On 01/03/2011 03:25 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote: > Hi! > > Sorry for the late answer. The student is now in my office and there is indeed a problem. > UUIDPlugin is not present on his harddisk. Maybe built in the VM. > > I found the class UUID and remove the call to the primitive. It works. Strange problem. Shall I report it in codegoogle? Has been known for two years, shouldn't happen, nobody cares. Cheers Philippe

Jan. 3, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Crash on saving with Monticello

by Alexandre Bergel

Hi! Sorry for the late answer. The student is now in my office and there is indeed a problem. UUIDPlugin is not present on his harddisk. Maybe built in the VM. I found the class UUID and remove the call to the primitive. It works. Strange problem. Shall I report it in codegoogle? Cheers, Alexandre On 28 Dec 2010, at 10:09, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 2:00 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre(a)bergel.eu> wrote: > Hi! > > Several of my students experience a crash of Pharo when saving with Monticello. They all use linux. I can ask for more detailed description. > Are we the only one to experience this? > > > yes, probably the UUID known problem. Just renaming / removing the plugin may work. > Are they in Ubuntu/debian? > > Please let us know if we should do this for the PharoOneClick image. > > cheers > > mariano > > Cheers, > Alexandre > -- > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > > > -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

Jan. 3, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Issue 3436 in pharo: #copyFrom: is broken

by pharo＠googlecode.com

Comment #9 on issue 3436 by step...(a)stack.nl: #copyFrom: is broken http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=3436 Then the real question is: why do we have copyFrom:to:? To be in collection protocol style, that could be from:to:. It is not reliably derivable from the protocol name if you get a copy or mutate the original.

Jan. 3, 2011

[Pharo-project] [update 1.2] #12292

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

12292 ----- - Issue 3414: CompilerEvaluationTest>>#testEvaluationOfSelfSend fails. Thanks Igor :) - Issue 3503: LongMessageDialogWindow should be resizeable. Thanks Alain Plantec Stef

Jan. 3, 2011