February 2013 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-project] About Monticello Meta Data...

by Craig Latta

Hoi-- Marcus writes: > we need to get rid of all ways of doing things that makes us > distinguish the release from any other image. > > Aka: .changes and .sources are evil. Evil, I say. Yes, evil and anachronistic. Buggy whips for a Tesla. Frank writes: > ...devs need to dogfood, and the dogfood's the released image. Indeed, you should eat your own cooking... but if you're making dogfood, something's wrong. :) -C -- Craig Latta www.netjam.org/resume +31 6 2757 7177 (SMS ok) + 1 415 287 3547 (no SMS)

Feb. 13, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] [ann] glamorous debugger (alpha)

by stephane ducasse

On Feb 13, 2013, at 11:09 AM, Damien Cassou <damien.cassou(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:04 AM, stephane ducasse > <stephane.ducasse(a)free.fr> wrote: >> excellent >> we should push it in 3.0 :) > > along with Glamour? Or do you want a spec-based UI as well? there is already a spec version. We should extend it and refine it. > > -- > Damien Cassou > http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st > > "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without > losing enthusiasm." > Winston Churchill >

Feb. 13, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] [ann] glamorous debugger (alpha)

by Damien Cassou

On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:04 AM, stephane ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)free.fr> wrote: > excellent > we should push it in 3.0 :) along with Glamour? Or do you want a spec-based UI as well? -- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without losing enthusiasm." Winston Churchill

Feb. 13, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] [ann] glamorous debugger (alpha)

by stephane ducasse

excellent we should push it in 3.0 :) > Hi Stef, > > The bug with Run to Here should be fixed. This and al the other actions should work just > like in the current debugger. This means that when the current debugger breaks they would also break :) > > There are still some issues with the ui when there is unsaved content in the editor but it is usable. > > > Andrei > > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 10:16 PM, StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: > > On Jan 31, 2013, at 1:35 PM, Andrei Vasile Chis wrote: > > > > > Hi Stef, > > > > Andrei I will integrate the Spec Widget Changes now. > > Then I played with the debugger with vanessa and we got a bit lost because the text selection does not show > > where is the expression currently with over or into. > > > > This should be fixed now. > > > > > > At one point we got to new process and it blocked also everything. > > > > Not good. Do you what you deed? > > step into â¦. or something like that until I arrived to newProcess > > I can restart and retry because I'm a bug attractor. > > > > > > > So after restarting in a new image we tried run to here and we were confused :) > > > > do: aBlock > > "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:." > > 1 to: self size do: > > [:index | aBlock value: (self at: index)] > > > > I put the cursor in the block before aBlock and clicked on Run to Here but nothing happened > > > > I will look at this. In theory now it should work like in the current debugger. > > > > Also now in the spec interface I get some very strange bugs that are not in the glamour one. > > Somehow some things do not update ok. I'll dig to see what happens. > > > > I'll let you know when I have something more. > > > > Andrei > > > > >

Feb. 13, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] About Monticello Meta Data...

by stephane ducasse

So concretely what can we do? Let us try to condense sources and see if it is working. Stef

Feb. 13, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] [ann] glamorous debugger (alpha)

by Tudor Girba

Great work, Andrei! Doru On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 9:49 AM, Andrei Vasile Chis < chisvasileandrei(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Stef, > > The bug with Run to Here should be fixed. This and al the other actions > should work just > like in the current debugger. This means that when the current debugger > breaks they would also break :) > > There are still some issues with the ui when there is unsaved content in > the editor but it is usable. > > > Andrei > > > On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 10:16 PM, StÃ©phane Ducasse < > stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: > >> >> On Jan 31, 2013, at 1:35 PM, Andrei Vasile Chis wrote: >> >> > >> > Hi Stef, >> > >> > Andrei I will integrate the Spec Widget Changes now. >> > Then I played with the debugger with vanessa and we got a bit lost >> because the text selection does not show >> > where is the expression currently with over or into. >> > >> > This should be fixed now. >> > >> > >> > At one point we got to new process and it blocked also everything. >> > >> > Not good. Do you what you deed? >> >> step into â¦. or something like that until I arrived to newProcess >> >> I can restart and retry because I'm a bug attractor. >> >> > >> > >> > So after restarting in a new image we tried run to here and we were >> confused :) >> > >> > do: aBlock >> > "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:." >> > 1 to: self size do: >> > [:index | aBlock value: (self at: index)] >> > >> > I put the cursor in the block before aBlock and clicked on Run to Here >> but nothing happened >> > >> > I will look at this. In theory now it should work like in the current >> debugger. >> > >> > Also now in the spec interface I get some very strange bugs that are >> not in the glamour one. >> > Somehow some things do not update ok. I'll dig to see what happens. >> > >> > I'll let you know when I have something more. >> > >> > Andrei >> > >> >> >> > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"

Feb. 13, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] [ann] glamorous debugger (alpha)

by Andrei Vasile Chis

Hi Stef, The bug with Run to Here should be fixed. This and al the other actions should work just like in the current debugger. This means that when the current debugger breaks they would also break :) There are still some issues with the ui when there is unsaved content in the editor but it is usable. Andrei On Thu, Jan 31, 2013 at 10:16 PM, StÃ©phane Ducasse < stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote: > > On Jan 31, 2013, at 1:35 PM, Andrei Vasile Chis wrote: > > > > > Hi Stef, > > > > Andrei I will integrate the Spec Widget Changes now. > > Then I played with the debugger with vanessa and we got a bit lost > because the text selection does not show > > where is the expression currently with over or into. > > > > This should be fixed now. > > > > > > At one point we got to new process and it blocked also everything. > > > > Not good. Do you what you deed? > > step into â¦. or something like that until I arrived to newProcess > > I can restart and retry because I'm a bug attractor. > > > > > > > So after restarting in a new image we tried run to here and we were > confused :) > > > > do: aBlock > > "Refer to the comment in Collection|do:." > > 1 to: self size do: > > [:index | aBlock value: (self at: index)] > > > > I put the cursor in the block before aBlock and clicked on Run to Here > but nothing happened > > > > I will look at this. In theory now it should work like in the current > debugger. > > > > Also now in the spec interface I get some very strange bugs that are not > in the glamour one. > > Somehow some things do not update ok. I'll dig to see what happens. > > > > I'll let you know when I have something more. > > > > Andrei > > > > >

Feb. 13, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] About Monticello Meta Data...

by Frank Shearar

On 13 February 2013 07:59, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> wrote: > > On Feb 13, 2013, at 8:55 AM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> So you're saying that it's just that ReleaseBuilder needs to actually >> do these things - condense sources etc. - and then run some tests to >> show that condensing's actually broken. >> > No, we need to get rid of all ways of doing things that makes us distinguish > the release from any other image. Yes - devs need to dogfood, and the dogfood's the released image. OH. Oh, right. > Aka: .changes and .sources are evil. Evil, I say. No arguments here! So "fix condenseSources" actually means "remove the need to do so in the first place". Right! frank > Marcus >

Feb. 13, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] About Monticello Meta Data...

by Marcus Denker

On Feb 13, 2013, at 8:55 AM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > So you're saying that it's just that ReleaseBuilder needs to actually > do these things - condense sources etc. - and then run some tests to > show that condensing's actually broken. > No, we need to get rid of all ways of doing things that makes us distinguish the release from any other image. Aka: .changes and .sources are evil. Evil, I say. Marcus

Feb. 13, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] About Monticello Meta Data...

by Marcus Denker

On Feb 13, 2013, at 8:51 AM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> wrote: > > >> * take an old image (somewhere early in 4.4's history) >> * update it >> * store that as one artifact, A >> * run tests on a copy to get the test results >> * a second job takes A and runs the necessary ReleaseBuilder to get B, >> a release candidate. >> > > This is what we do, too. > > What I mean are things like condensing the sources and changes. > Or Monticello meta dataâ¦ something that grows with every commit > is not something that is sustainable. > If "the release image" is different to what everyone downloads in the development phase for development and testing, we do something wrong. Marcus

Feb. 13, 2013