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

Re: [Pharo-project] Pharo inbox changed

by Camille Teruel

On 28 mars 2013, at 13:15, Sean P. DeNigris wrote: > EstebanLM wrote >> the bad news: since sthub still does not accepts open commits, you need to >> be added to the repository to commit slices (sorry about that) > > WTF! This seems totally wrong and bad and evil and... ;) I know we love > StHub, but this is unsustainable. Unless StHub is adding open commits today, > why not put the inbox on ss3 temporarily. I feel we will lose a /lot/ of > help this way. Not everyone is willing to go through/knows about the > communication process of being added... > > p.s. please add me :) You are already in "Pharo team" group so you can commit. > > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-inbox-changed-tp4677312p4678741.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >

March 28, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] Platform and portable versions for Pharo 2.0 too

by Marcus Denker

On Mar 28, 2013, at 1:14 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> wrote: > > On Mar 28, 2013, at 1:12 PM, "Sean P. DeNigris" <sean(a)clipperadams.com> wrote: > >> EstebanLM wrote >>> mmm... the problem is that the "platform" versions are not the release, >>> are nightly builds (it lacks the welcome workspace). >> >> Oops. Can we have save platform release versions somewhere? Since new users >> are having trouble with the one-click/portable version, I'd hate to lose the >> next year before we have something easy for themâ¦ >> > Sorryâ¦ we are working already on too many things and there has to be a boundary > somewhere. > > People don't realize just how much work was in the release last weekâ¦ We can do things, but we need to control what we do. Changing the relase files one week after randomly where we are in the situation that the build files are *not* yet the relased files (we are working on that, there is a tracker entryâ¦) is deadly. Please let it like it is and we move *controlled* forward. Marcus

March 28, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] Platform and portable versions for Pharo 2.0 too

by Sean P. DeNigris

Marcus Denker-4 wrote > Sorryâ¦ we are working already on too many things and there has to be a > boundary > somewhere. I don't think this is the right place to draw it. I'm going to work now, but I'll do it later. I guess I could just take the nightly ones and manually stick in the release image, right? ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Platform-and-portable-versions-for-Pharo-2-0-too-tp46… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

March 28, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] Pharo inbox changed

by Sean P. DeNigris

EstebanLM wrote > the bad news: since sthub still does not accepts open commits, you need to > be added to the repository to commit slices (sorry about that) WTF! This seems totally wrong and bad and evil and... ;) I know we love StHub, but this is unsustainable. Unless StHub is adding open commits today, why not put the inbox on ss3 temporarily. I feel we will lose a /lot/ of help this way. Not everyone is willing to go through/knows about the communication process of being added... p.s. please add me :) ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-inbox-changed-tp4677312p4678741.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

March 28, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] Platform and portable versions for Pharo 2.0 too

by Marcus Denker

On Mar 28, 2013, at 1:12 PM, "Sean P. DeNigris" <sean(a)clipperadams.com> wrote: > EstebanLM wrote >> mmm... the problem is that the "platform" versions are not the release, >> are nightly builds (it lacks the welcome workspace). > > Oops. Can we have save platform release versions somewhere? Since new users > are having trouble with the one-click/portable version, I'd hate to lose the > next year before we have something easy for themâ¦ > Sorryâ¦ we are working already on too many things and there has to be a boundary somewhere. Marcus

March 28, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] Platform and portable versions for Pharo 2.0 too

by Sean P. DeNigris

EstebanLM wrote > mmm... the problem is that the "platform" versions are not the release, > are nightly builds (it lacks the welcome workspace). Oops. Can we have save platform release versions somewhere? Since new users are having trouble with the one-click/portable version, I'd hate to lose the next year before we have something easy for them... ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Platform-and-portable-versions-for-Pharo-2-0-too-tp46… Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

March 28, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] Platform and portable versions for Pharo 2.0 too

by Marcus Denker

On Mar 28, 2013, at 1:06 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: > mmm... the problem is that the "platform" versions are not the release, are nightly builds (it lacks the welcome workspace). > yes, we should take careâ¦ if it is for power users, it should not be on the website. We need to take care that the idea was not to complicate everything but to simplify. The whole how-we-distribute Pharo is work in Progress. It will change over the next Months. We should control very much the officially released image, else all the work last monday was for nothing. Marcus > Esteban > > On Mar 28, 2013, at 12:59 PM, "Sean P. DeNigris" <sean(a)clipperadams.com> wrote: > >> EstebanLM wrote >>> I "backported" the 3.0 publish mechanism to Pharo 2.0. >>> ... >>> http://files.pharo.org/platform/ >> >> I updated http://www.pharo-project.org/pharo-download/release-2-0 to the >> "Portable" terminology, with an updated description, and put the platform >> versions at the top, as the first choice. >> >> >> >> ----- >> Cheers, >> Sean >> -- >> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Platform-and-portable-versions-for-Pharo-2-0-too-tp46… >> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> > >

March 28, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] Platform and portable versions for Pharo 2.0 too

by Esteban Lorenzano

mmm... the problem is that the "platform" versions are not the release, are nightly builds (it lacks the welcome workspace). Esteban On Mar 28, 2013, at 12:59 PM, "Sean P. DeNigris" <sean(a)clipperadams.com> wrote: > EstebanLM wrote >> I "backported" the 3.0 publish mechanism to Pharo 2.0. >> ... >> http://files.pharo.org/platform/ > > I updated http://www.pharo-project.org/pharo-download/release-2-0 to the > "Portable" terminology, with an updated description, and put the platform > versions at the top, as the first choice. > > > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Platform-and-portable-versions-for-Pharo-2-0-too-tp46… > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >

March 28, 2013

[Pharo-project] bump: pharo wikipedia page sucks

by Esteban Lorenzano

Hi, have you seen it? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pharo it is old, small, non-accurate and well... it could receive a lot of love :) (the weird thing is that the image is actually a 2.0 image, he) Can anyone adopt the page and update it? thanks, Esteban ps: also... we have a lot of spanish speakers in this list (including myself). It is a shame that we do not have a spanish version :)

March 28, 2013

Re: [Pharo-project] Multiselect in method pane

by Camillo Bruni

please! :) that would save some major pain here and there ;) On 2013-03-28, at 12:57, Benjamin <benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo(a)gmail.com> wrote: > if it works go ahead ;) > > Ben > > On Mar 28, 2013, at 12:48 PM, Norbert Hartl <norbert(a)hartl.name> wrote: > >> >> Am 28.03.2013 um 11:51 schrieb stephane ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)free.fr>: >> >>> >>> On Mar 28, 2013, at 11:21 AM, Norbert Hartl <norbert(a)hartl.name> wrote: >>> >>>> What is the rationale for having the method pane as multi-select list? I don't think it is of greater use when editing code. I could imagine that some refactoring tasks could be easier having multi-select lists. >>>> >>>> Anyway, if I try to rename a method without using the refactoring engine I just change the selector, save and delete the method with the old selector. In pharo 2.0 when you rename a method and then click on the old selector both methods are selected and shortcut invocation for deleting deletes both. Which is quite annoying. In my opinion there is no reason for two methods being selected. If you agree I'll happily enter a bug. >>> >>> >>> The problem is not a nautilus bug but a compiled method one if I remember correctly. >>> because two methods with the same body are equal. >>> >> It happens in MethodWidget>>#methodSelectionAt:put. When PluggableIconListMorph updates the list selection it calls the MethodWidget to set true on the new method selected. But MethodWidget uses a Dictionary for instVar methodSelection and finds the old method being equal and enables this. >> As I don't see a reason why a selection should be done by equality this behavior can be fixed by using an IdentityDictionary. >> >> Fix: >> >> MethodWidget>>#initialize >> >> super initialize. >> methodsSelection := IdentityDictionary new. >> >> Any arguments? >> >> Norbert >

March 28, 2013