December 2017 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Drag and drop of methods

by Cyril Ferlicot D.

Hi, In the latest Pharo 7 I cannot drag and drop methods anymore in Nautilus. Pharo version: Pharo-7.0+alpha.build.389.sha.e642e96a93951b2765dc808a512b81dc3d52e150 (32 Bit) Stack: TransferMorph(Object)>>doesNotUnderstand: #buildWithSpec FTPluggableIconListMorphAdaptorDataSource>>transferFor:from: FTPluggableIconListMorphAdaptor(FTTableMorph)>>startDrag: MouseClickState>>drag: MouseClickState>>handleEvent:from: HandMorph>>handleEvent: HandMorph>>processEventsFromQueue: HandMorph>>processEvents -- Cyril Ferlicot https://ferlicot.fr http://www.synectique.eu 2 rue Jacques PrÃ©vert 01, 59650 Villeneuve d'ascq France

Dec. 16, 2017

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #389: SUCCESS

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #389 was: SUCCESS. Could not extract further issue information from commit message: Tx. Indeed it is better that way Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Dec. 16, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [IMPORTANT] PHARO CONTRIBUTION PROCESS UPDATED! PLEASE READ!

by Esteban Lorenzano

> On 16 Dec 2017, at 17:24, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > OK so I restarted everything from scratch: > - deleted my fork > - reforked > - clone pharo again > - here is some feedback > > In the tutorial add /pharo + src in the screenshot > > > Then when I add the local repository I get uncommited changes and I do > not understand why? this is also a bug (or something I still do not fully understand why it happens). This needs to be corrected with the new UI Esteban > > > > > > On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 9:57 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> On 16 Dec 2017, at 09:42, Alistair Grant <akgrant0710(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Esteban, >> >> On 16 December 2017 at 09:05, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On 15 Dec 2017, at 17:37, Alistair Grant <akgrant0710(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Esteban, >> >> I had no problems following the process (Ubuntu 16.04, >> Pharo7.0-32bit-e175bc2.image, fogbugz 20872). :-) >> >> I guess that you have already thought of this, but... Is there any >> reason why we can't just put up a dialog asking for the user's github >> credentials and fogbugz issue number and then automatically clone the >> repository, configure the upstream remote and create the issue branch. >> That would remove most of the remaining manual steps. >> >> I realise that it only works for option 1, although where people >> configure a common pharo-local, it could check for a pre-existing >> clone and use that one. >> >> >> "I realiseâ means you tried and it didnât work? >> because in my tests it worked as good as the first one (I tested on >> windows), but that may need to be âre-validatedâ :) >> >> Esteban >> >> >> The contribution process works fine (even on linux :-)). >> >> The "I realise" paragraph is a comment on my suggestion to try and >> reduce the number of manual steps required (and is actually wrong). >> Just to rephrase (and extend) the suggestion, I think we could create >> a single dialog that currently covers the following steps (from your >> instructions): >> >> 1. Clone a fresh repository, or point to an existing repository. >> 2. Tell Iceberg about pharo-project >> 3. Create a new branch from the fogbugz issue >> >> >> ah, I got lost in translation ;) >> >> Esteban >> >> >> Cheers, >> Alistair >> >> >> >> >> Cheers, >> Alistair >> >> On 14 December 2017 at 13:19, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> >> Hi! >> >> Iâm working on simplifying the contribution process, after collecting >> opinions/experiences last couple of months. >> As you know, Pharo contribution process is still WIP and we aim to have it >> as smooth as possible for Pharo 7.0 release. Now, after observe the idea of >> the âsystem repositoriesâ was a bad idea because it introduced extra and non >> standard âpathâ to contribution, I managed to remove that to reestablish >> âthe regular wayâ: you will now need to add pharo repository just as any >> other repository you add, by cloning or adding local repository. >> >> I took Guilleâs doc and moved it to pharo project (it does not has sense to >> have it living in a contributorâs repository when is so important). You can >> find it here: >> >> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/wiki/Contribute-a-fix-to-Pharo >> >> This document is also updated to reveal this new process, please read it. >> >> How to update your startup scripts? >> Some people has added startup scripts to easy the first part of >> contribution. Instead enabling system repositories, etc. you now need to >> replace that with this: >> >> (IceRepositoryCreator new >> location: '/path/to/pharo-project/pharo' asFileReference; >> subdirectory: 'src'; >> createRepository) >> register >> >> PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASEâ¦ take a moment to read and try the document. Is very >> important that document reflects new process and works reliable in different >> scenarios (I validated it on macOS and Windows, and assumed it worked fine >> on linux but you knowâ¦ bad assumptions is the base of failure ;) ) >> >> Iâm eager to hear your feedback and continue enhancing the process. >> >> (yes, Stef, I know UI is still cumbersomeâ¦ Iâm working on that :) ) >> >> cheers! >> Esteban >> >> > <Screen Shot 2017-12-16 at 17.23.53.png>

Dec. 16, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [IMPORTANT] PHARO CONTRIBUTION PROCESS UPDATED! PLEASE READ!

by Esteban Lorenzano

> On 16 Dec 2017, at 17:32, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I did a little pass on the wiki to make the flow clearer cool! :) > > > On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:26 PM, Stephane Ducasse > <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> In the tutorial: >> >> - Put a little heading before >> >> "You need to add pharo repository as a remote >> (git@github.com:pharo-project/pharo.git)." >> >> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:25 PM, Stephane Ducasse >> <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> I double clicked and it did a massive amount of stuff and finally told >>> me that it is up to date. >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Stephane Ducasse >>> <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> OK so I restarted everything from scratch: >>>> - deleted my fork >>>> - reforked >>>> - clone pharo again >>>> - here is some feedback >>>> >>>> In the tutorial add /pharo + src in the screenshot >>>> >>>> >>>> Then when I add the local repository I get uncommited changes and I do >>>> not understand why? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 9:57 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 16 Dec 2017, at 09:42, Alistair Grant <akgrant0710(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Esteban, >>>>> >>>>> On 16 December 2017 at 09:05, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 15 Dec 2017, at 17:37, Alistair Grant <akgrant0710(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi Esteban, >>>>> >>>>> I had no problems following the process (Ubuntu 16.04, >>>>> Pharo7.0-32bit-e175bc2.image, fogbugz 20872). :-) >>>>> >>>>> I guess that you have already thought of this, but... Is there any >>>>> reason why we can't just put up a dialog asking for the user's github >>>>> credentials and fogbugz issue number and then automatically clone the >>>>> repository, configure the upstream remote and create the issue branch. >>>>> That would remove most of the remaining manual steps. >>>>> >>>>> I realise that it only works for option 1, although where people >>>>> configure a common pharo-local, it could check for a pre-existing >>>>> clone and use that one. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> "I realiseâ means you tried and it didnât work? >>>>> because in my tests it worked as good as the first one (I tested on >>>>> windows), but that may need to be âre-validatedâ :) >>>>> >>>>> Esteban >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The contribution process works fine (even on linux :-)). >>>>> >>>>> The "I realise" paragraph is a comment on my suggestion to try and >>>>> reduce the number of manual steps required (and is actually wrong). >>>>> Just to rephrase (and extend) the suggestion, I think we could create >>>>> a single dialog that currently covers the following steps (from your >>>>> instructions): >>>>> >>>>> 1. Clone a fresh repository, or point to an existing repository. >>>>> 2. Tell Iceberg about pharo-project >>>>> 3. Create a new branch from the fogbugz issue >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ah, I got lost in translation ;) >>>>> >>>>> Esteban >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Alistair >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Alistair >>>>> >>>>> On 14 December 2017 at 13:19, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi! >>>>> >>>>> Iâm working on simplifying the contribution process, after collecting >>>>> opinions/experiences last couple of months. >>>>> As you know, Pharo contribution process is still WIP and we aim to have it >>>>> as smooth as possible for Pharo 7.0 release. Now, after observe the idea of >>>>> the âsystem repositoriesâ was a bad idea because it introduced extra and non >>>>> standard âpathâ to contribution, I managed to remove that to reestablish >>>>> âthe regular wayâ: you will now need to add pharo repository just as any >>>>> other repository you add, by cloning or adding local repository. >>>>> >>>>> I took Guilleâs doc and moved it to pharo project (it does not has sense to >>>>> have it living in a contributorâs repository when is so important). You can >>>>> find it here: >>>>> >>>>> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/wiki/Contribute-a-fix-to-Pharo >>>>> >>>>> This document is also updated to reveal this new process, please read it. >>>>> >>>>> How to update your startup scripts? >>>>> Some people has added startup scripts to easy the first part of >>>>> contribution. Instead enabling system repositories, etc. you now need to >>>>> replace that with this: >>>>> >>>>> (IceRepositoryCreator new >>>>> location: '/path/to/pharo-project/pharo' asFileReference; >>>>> subdirectory: 'src'; >>>>> createRepository) >>>>> register >>>>> >>>>> PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASEâ¦ take a moment to read and try the document. Is very >>>>> important that document reflects new process and works reliable in different >>>>> scenarios (I validated it on macOS and Windows, and assumed it worked fine >>>>> on linux but you knowâ¦ bad assumptions is the base of failure ;) ) >>>>> >>>>> Iâm eager to hear your feedback and continue enhancing the process. >>>>> >>>>> (yes, Stef, I know UI is still cumbersomeâ¦ Iâm working on that :) ) >>>>> >>>>> cheers! >>>>> Esteban >>>>> >>>>> >

Dec. 16, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [IMPORTANT] PHARO CONTRIBUTION PROCESS UPDATED! PLEASE READ!

by Esteban Lorenzano

> On 16 Dec 2017, at 17:39, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I committed my code for issue 20861 and I do not understand what I see > > I do not understand why I get local changes with empty packages. :( thatâs a bug: there are no changes to commit (which is correct), but the refresh lets there the original packages. It is in the todo to correct this :) > > Stef > > On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Stephane Ducasse > <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> I did a little pass on the wiki to make the flow clearer >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:26 PM, Stephane Ducasse >> <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> In the tutorial: >>> >>> - Put a little heading before >>> >>> "You need to add pharo repository as a remote >>> (git@github.com:pharo-project/pharo.git)." >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:25 PM, Stephane Ducasse >>> <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> I double clicked and it did a massive amount of stuff and finally told >>>> me that it is up to date. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Stephane Ducasse >>>> <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> OK so I restarted everything from scratch: >>>>> - deleted my fork >>>>> - reforked >>>>> - clone pharo again >>>>> - here is some feedback >>>>> >>>>> In the tutorial add /pharo + src in the screenshot >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Then when I add the local repository I get uncommited changes and I do >>>>> not understand why? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 9:57 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 16 Dec 2017, at 09:42, Alistair Grant <akgrant0710(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Esteban, >>>>>> >>>>>> On 16 December 2017 at 09:05, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 15 Dec 2017, at 17:37, Alistair Grant <akgrant0710(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Esteban, >>>>>> >>>>>> I had no problems following the process (Ubuntu 16.04, >>>>>> Pharo7.0-32bit-e175bc2.image, fogbugz 20872). :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> I guess that you have already thought of this, but... Is there any >>>>>> reason why we can't just put up a dialog asking for the user's github >>>>>> credentials and fogbugz issue number and then automatically clone the >>>>>> repository, configure the upstream remote and create the issue branch. >>>>>> That would remove most of the remaining manual steps. >>>>>> >>>>>> I realise that it only works for option 1, although where people >>>>>> configure a common pharo-local, it could check for a pre-existing >>>>>> clone and use that one. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "I realiseâ means you tried and it didnât work? >>>>>> because in my tests it worked as good as the first one (I tested on >>>>>> windows), but that may need to be âre-validatedâ :) >>>>>> >>>>>> Esteban >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The contribution process works fine (even on linux :-)). >>>>>> >>>>>> The "I realise" paragraph is a comment on my suggestion to try and >>>>>> reduce the number of manual steps required (and is actually wrong). >>>>>> Just to rephrase (and extend) the suggestion, I think we could create >>>>>> a single dialog that currently covers the following steps (from your >>>>>> instructions): >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. Clone a fresh repository, or point to an existing repository. >>>>>> 2. Tell Iceberg about pharo-project >>>>>> 3. Create a new branch from the fogbugz issue >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ah, I got lost in translation ;) >>>>>> >>>>>> Esteban >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Alistair >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Alistair >>>>>> >>>>>> On 14 December 2017 at 13:19, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi! >>>>>> >>>>>> Iâm working on simplifying the contribution process, after collecting >>>>>> opinions/experiences last couple of months. >>>>>> As you know, Pharo contribution process is still WIP and we aim to have it >>>>>> as smooth as possible for Pharo 7.0 release. Now, after observe the idea of >>>>>> the âsystem repositoriesâ was a bad idea because it introduced extra and non >>>>>> standard âpathâ to contribution, I managed to remove that to reestablish >>>>>> âthe regular wayâ: you will now need to add pharo repository just as any >>>>>> other repository you add, by cloning or adding local repository. >>>>>> >>>>>> I took Guilleâs doc and moved it to pharo project (it does not has sense to >>>>>> have it living in a contributorâs repository when is so important). You can >>>>>> find it here: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/wiki/Contribute-a-fix-to-Pharo >>>>>> >>>>>> This document is also updated to reveal this new process, please read it. >>>>>> >>>>>> How to update your startup scripts? >>>>>> Some people has added startup scripts to easy the first part of >>>>>> contribution. Instead enabling system repositories, etc. you now need to >>>>>> replace that with this: >>>>>> >>>>>> (IceRepositoryCreator new >>>>>> location: '/path/to/pharo-project/pharo' asFileReference; >>>>>> subdirectory: 'src'; >>>>>> createRepository) >>>>>> register >>>>>> >>>>>> PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASEâ¦ take a moment to read and try the document. Is very >>>>>> important that document reflects new process and works reliable in different >>>>>> scenarios (I validated it on macOS and Windows, and assumed it worked fine >>>>>> on linux but you knowâ¦ bad assumptions is the base of failure ;) ) >>>>>> >>>>>> Iâm eager to hear your feedback and continue enhancing the process. >>>>>> >>>>>> (yes, Stef, I know UI is still cumbersomeâ¦ Iâm working on that :) ) >>>>>> >>>>>> cheers! >>>>>> Esteban >>>>>> >>>>>> > <Screen Shot 2017-12-16 at 17.37.50.png>

Dec. 16, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [IMPORTANT] PHARO CONTRIBUTION PROCESS UPDATED! PLEASE READ!

by Esteban Lorenzano

> On 16 Dec 2017, at 17:55, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Esteban > > Now how can I maintain my fork up to date? there is a âsynchronise repositoriesâ option there, at the side of âcreate branch from fogbugzâ. > This is not in the tutorial and to me it was a major problem and a big > source of pain. it is not there because you do not need it. when you âcreate branch from fogbugzâ, it will take your image version and branch from there. Then, when you push to your remote, you will push correctly. There is no need to have syncd the forks to contributeâ¦ Now, if you do âsynchronise repositoriesâ, it will take what is in pharo-project/pharo/development branch and it will sync that with your pharo/development branch. But againâ¦ there is no need to do this to contribute. Esteban > Stef > > On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:39 PM, Stephane Ducasse > <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> I committed my code for issue 20861 and I do not understand what I see >> >> I do not understand why I get local changes with empty packages. :( >> >> Stef >> >> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Stephane Ducasse >> <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> I did a little pass on the wiki to make the flow clearer >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:26 PM, Stephane Ducasse >>> <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> In the tutorial: >>>> >>>> - Put a little heading before >>>> >>>> "You need to add pharo repository as a remote >>>> (git@github.com:pharo-project/pharo.git)." >>>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:25 PM, Stephane Ducasse >>>> <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> I double clicked and it did a massive amount of stuff and finally told >>>>> me that it is up to date. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Stephane Ducasse >>>>> <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> OK so I restarted everything from scratch: >>>>>> - deleted my fork >>>>>> - reforked >>>>>> - clone pharo again >>>>>> - here is some feedback >>>>>> >>>>>> In the tutorial add /pharo + src in the screenshot >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Then when I add the local repository I get uncommited changes and I do >>>>>> not understand why? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 9:57 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 16 Dec 2017, at 09:42, Alistair Grant <akgrant0710(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Esteban, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 16 December 2017 at 09:05, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 15 Dec 2017, at 17:37, Alistair Grant <akgrant0710(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Esteban, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I had no problems following the process (Ubuntu 16.04, >>>>>>> Pharo7.0-32bit-e175bc2.image, fogbugz 20872). :-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I guess that you have already thought of this, but... Is there any >>>>>>> reason why we can't just put up a dialog asking for the user's github >>>>>>> credentials and fogbugz issue number and then automatically clone the >>>>>>> repository, configure the upstream remote and create the issue branch. >>>>>>> That would remove most of the remaining manual steps. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I realise that it only works for option 1, although where people >>>>>>> configure a common pharo-local, it could check for a pre-existing >>>>>>> clone and use that one. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "I realiseâ means you tried and it didnât work? >>>>>>> because in my tests it worked as good as the first one (I tested on >>>>>>> windows), but that may need to be âre-validatedâ :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Esteban >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The contribution process works fine (even on linux :-)). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The "I realise" paragraph is a comment on my suggestion to try and >>>>>>> reduce the number of manual steps required (and is actually wrong). >>>>>>> Just to rephrase (and extend) the suggestion, I think we could create >>>>>>> a single dialog that currently covers the following steps (from your >>>>>>> instructions): >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. Clone a fresh repository, or point to an existing repository. >>>>>>> 2. Tell Iceberg about pharo-project >>>>>>> 3. Create a new branch from the fogbugz issue >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ah, I got lost in translation ;) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Esteban >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>> Alistair >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>> Alistair >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 14 December 2017 at 13:19, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Iâm working on simplifying the contribution process, after collecting >>>>>>> opinions/experiences last couple of months. >>>>>>> As you know, Pharo contribution process is still WIP and we aim to have it >>>>>>> as smooth as possible for Pharo 7.0 release. Now, after observe the idea of >>>>>>> the âsystem repositoriesâ was a bad idea because it introduced extra and non >>>>>>> standard âpathâ to contribution, I managed to remove that to reestablish >>>>>>> âthe regular wayâ: you will now need to add pharo repository just as any >>>>>>> other repository you add, by cloning or adding local repository. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I took Guilleâs doc and moved it to pharo project (it does not has sense to >>>>>>> have it living in a contributorâs repository when is so important). You can >>>>>>> find it here: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/wiki/Contribute-a-fix-to-Pharo >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This document is also updated to reveal this new process, please read it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> How to update your startup scripts? >>>>>>> Some people has added startup scripts to easy the first part of >>>>>>> contribution. Instead enabling system repositories, etc. you now need to >>>>>>> replace that with this: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (IceRepositoryCreator new >>>>>>> location: '/path/to/pharo-project/pharo' asFileReference; >>>>>>> subdirectory: 'src'; >>>>>>> createRepository) >>>>>>> register >>>>>>> >>>>>>> PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASEâ¦ take a moment to read and try the document. Is very >>>>>>> important that document reflects new process and works reliable in different >>>>>>> scenarios (I validated it on macOS and Windows, and assumed it worked fine >>>>>>> on linux but you knowâ¦ bad assumptions is the base of failure ;) ) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Iâm eager to hear your feedback and continue enhancing the process. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (yes, Stef, I know UI is still cumbersomeâ¦ Iâm working on that :) ) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> cheers! >>>>>>> Esteban >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >

Dec. 16, 2017

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #388: SUCCESS

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #388 was: SUCCESS. Could not extract further issue information from commit message: Look nicer. And tx! Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Dec. 16, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [IMPORTANT] PHARO CONTRIBUTION PROCESS UPDATED! PLEASE READ!

by Stephane Ducasse

I clicked on pharo-project remote and I did fetch. thinking stupidly that it will update my local repo. And I get the following .... and I do not understand whay I get 1965 not published. and I do not Then I siwtched branch and went back to development. and I should be able to now push to my remote. So I tried but I'm totally unsure if this is correct. On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:55 PM, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Esteban > > Now how can I maintain my fork up to date? > This is not in the tutorial and to me it was a major problem and a big > source of pain. > Stef > > On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:39 PM, Stephane Ducasse > <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> I committed my code for issue 20861 and I do not understand what I see >> >> I do not understand why I get local changes with empty packages. :( >> >> Stef >> >> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Stephane Ducasse >> <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> I did a little pass on the wiki to make the flow clearer >>> >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:26 PM, Stephane Ducasse >>> <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> In the tutorial: >>>> >>>> - Put a little heading before >>>> >>>> "You need to add pharo repository as a remote >>>> (git@github.com:pharo-project/pharo.git)." >>>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:25 PM, Stephane Ducasse >>>> <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> I double clicked and it did a massive amount of stuff and finally told >>>>> me that it is up to date. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Stephane Ducasse >>>>> <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> OK so I restarted everything from scratch: >>>>>> - deleted my fork >>>>>> - reforked >>>>>> - clone pharo again >>>>>> - here is some feedback >>>>>> >>>>>> In the tutorial add /pharo + src in the screenshot >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Then when I add the local repository I get uncommited changes and I do >>>>>> not understand why? >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 9:57 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 16 Dec 2017, at 09:42, Alistair Grant <akgrant0710(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Esteban, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 16 December 2017 at 09:05, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 15 Dec 2017, at 17:37, Alistair Grant <akgrant0710(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi Esteban, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I had no problems following the process (Ubuntu 16.04, >>>>>>> Pharo7.0-32bit-e175bc2.image, fogbugz 20872). :-) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I guess that you have already thought of this, but... Is there any >>>>>>> reason why we can't just put up a dialog asking for the user's github >>>>>>> credentials and fogbugz issue number and then automatically clone the >>>>>>> repository, configure the upstream remote and create the issue branch. >>>>>>> That would remove most of the remaining manual steps. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I realise that it only works for option 1, although where people >>>>>>> configure a common pharo-local, it could check for a pre-existing >>>>>>> clone and use that one. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> "I realiseâ means you tried and it didnât work? >>>>>>> because in my tests it worked as good as the first one (I tested on >>>>>>> windows), but that may need to be âre-validatedâ :) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Esteban >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The contribution process works fine (even on linux :-)). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The "I realise" paragraph is a comment on my suggestion to try and >>>>>>> reduce the number of manual steps required (and is actually wrong). >>>>>>> Just to rephrase (and extend) the suggestion, I think we could create >>>>>>> a single dialog that currently covers the following steps (from your >>>>>>> instructions): >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 1. Clone a fresh repository, or point to an existing repository. >>>>>>> 2. Tell Iceberg about pharo-project >>>>>>> 3. Create a new branch from the fogbugz issue >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ah, I got lost in translation ;) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Esteban >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>> Alistair >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>>> Alistair >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 14 December 2017 at 13:19, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Hi! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Iâm working on simplifying the contribution process, after collecting >>>>>>> opinions/experiences last couple of months. >>>>>>> As you know, Pharo contribution process is still WIP and we aim to have it >>>>>>> as smooth as possible for Pharo 7.0 release. Now, after observe the idea of >>>>>>> the âsystem repositoriesâ was a bad idea because it introduced extra and non >>>>>>> standard âpathâ to contribution, I managed to remove that to reestablish >>>>>>> âthe regular wayâ: you will now need to add pharo repository just as any >>>>>>> other repository you add, by cloning or adding local repository. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I took Guilleâs doc and moved it to pharo project (it does not has sense to >>>>>>> have it living in a contributorâs repository when is so important). You can >>>>>>> find it here: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/wiki/Contribute-a-fix-to-Pharo >>>>>>> >>>>>>> This document is also updated to reveal this new process, please read it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> How to update your startup scripts? >>>>>>> Some people has added startup scripts to easy the first part of >>>>>>> contribution. Instead enabling system repositories, etc. you now need to >>>>>>> replace that with this: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (IceRepositoryCreator new >>>>>>> location: '/path/to/pharo-project/pharo' asFileReference; >>>>>>> subdirectory: 'src'; >>>>>>> createRepository) >>>>>>> register >>>>>>> >>>>>>> PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASEâ¦ take a moment to read and try the document. Is very >>>>>>> important that document reflects new process and works reliable in different >>>>>>> scenarios (I validated it on macOS and Windows, and assumed it worked fine >>>>>>> on linux but you knowâ¦ bad assumptions is the base of failure ;) ) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Iâm eager to hear your feedback and continue enhancing the process. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (yes, Stef, I know UI is still cumbersomeâ¦ Iâm working on that :) ) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> cheers! >>>>>>> Esteban >>>>>>> >>>>>>>

Dec. 16, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [IMPORTANT] PHARO CONTRIBUTION PROCESS UPDATED! PLEASE READ!

by Stephane Ducasse

Hi Esteban Now how can I maintain my fork up to date? This is not in the tutorial and to me it was a major problem and a big source of pain. Stef On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:39 PM, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: > I committed my code for issue 20861 and I do not understand what I see > > I do not understand why I get local changes with empty packages. :( > > Stef > > On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:32 PM, Stephane Ducasse > <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> I did a little pass on the wiki to make the flow clearer >> >> >> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:26 PM, Stephane Ducasse >> <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> In the tutorial: >>> >>> - Put a little heading before >>> >>> "You need to add pharo repository as a remote >>> (git@github.com:pharo-project/pharo.git)." >>> >>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:25 PM, Stephane Ducasse >>> <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> I double clicked and it did a massive amount of stuff and finally told >>>> me that it is up to date. >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 5:24 PM, Stephane Ducasse >>>> <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> OK so I restarted everything from scratch: >>>>> - deleted my fork >>>>> - reforked >>>>> - clone pharo again >>>>> - here is some feedback >>>>> >>>>> In the tutorial add /pharo + src in the screenshot >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Then when I add the local repository I get uncommited changes and I do >>>>> not understand why? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 9:57 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 16 Dec 2017, at 09:42, Alistair Grant <akgrant0710(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Esteban, >>>>>> >>>>>> On 16 December 2017 at 09:05, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 15 Dec 2017, at 17:37, Alistair Grant <akgrant0710(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi Esteban, >>>>>> >>>>>> I had no problems following the process (Ubuntu 16.04, >>>>>> Pharo7.0-32bit-e175bc2.image, fogbugz 20872). :-) >>>>>> >>>>>> I guess that you have already thought of this, but... Is there any >>>>>> reason why we can't just put up a dialog asking for the user's github >>>>>> credentials and fogbugz issue number and then automatically clone the >>>>>> repository, configure the upstream remote and create the issue branch. >>>>>> That would remove most of the remaining manual steps. >>>>>> >>>>>> I realise that it only works for option 1, although where people >>>>>> configure a common pharo-local, it could check for a pre-existing >>>>>> clone and use that one. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> "I realiseâ means you tried and it didnât work? >>>>>> because in my tests it worked as good as the first one (I tested on >>>>>> windows), but that may need to be âre-validatedâ :) >>>>>> >>>>>> Esteban >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> The contribution process works fine (even on linux :-)). >>>>>> >>>>>> The "I realise" paragraph is a comment on my suggestion to try and >>>>>> reduce the number of manual steps required (and is actually wrong). >>>>>> Just to rephrase (and extend) the suggestion, I think we could create >>>>>> a single dialog that currently covers the following steps (from your >>>>>> instructions): >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. Clone a fresh repository, or point to an existing repository. >>>>>> 2. Tell Iceberg about pharo-project >>>>>> 3. Create a new branch from the fogbugz issue >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ah, I got lost in translation ;) >>>>>> >>>>>> Esteban >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Alistair >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Cheers, >>>>>> Alistair >>>>>> >>>>>> On 14 December 2017 at 13:19, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi! >>>>>> >>>>>> Iâm working on simplifying the contribution process, after collecting >>>>>> opinions/experiences last couple of months. >>>>>> As you know, Pharo contribution process is still WIP and we aim to have it >>>>>> as smooth as possible for Pharo 7.0 release. Now, after observe the idea of >>>>>> the âsystem repositoriesâ was a bad idea because it introduced extra and non >>>>>> standard âpathâ to contribution, I managed to remove that to reestablish >>>>>> âthe regular wayâ: you will now need to add pharo repository just as any >>>>>> other repository you add, by cloning or adding local repository. >>>>>> >>>>>> I took Guilleâs doc and moved it to pharo project (it does not has sense to >>>>>> have it living in a contributorâs repository when is so important). You can >>>>>> find it here: >>>>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/wiki/Contribute-a-fix-to-Pharo >>>>>> >>>>>> This document is also updated to reveal this new process, please read it. >>>>>> >>>>>> How to update your startup scripts? >>>>>> Some people has added startup scripts to easy the first part of >>>>>> contribution. Instead enabling system repositories, etc. you now need to >>>>>> replace that with this: >>>>>> >>>>>> (IceRepositoryCreator new >>>>>> location: '/path/to/pharo-project/pharo' asFileReference; >>>>>> subdirectory: 'src'; >>>>>> createRepository) >>>>>> register >>>>>> >>>>>> PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASEâ¦ take a moment to read and try the document. Is very >>>>>> important that document reflects new process and works reliable in different >>>>>> scenarios (I validated it on macOS and Windows, and assumed it worked fine >>>>>> on linux but you knowâ¦ bad assumptions is the base of failure ;) ) >>>>>> >>>>>> Iâm eager to hear your feedback and continue enhancing the process. >>>>>> >>>>>> (yes, Stef, I know UI is still cumbersomeâ¦ Iâm working on that :) ) >>>>>> >>>>>> cheers! >>>>>> Esteban >>>>>> >>>>>>

Dec. 16, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] Implementors of margins in GLMRubScrolledTextBrick

by Stephane Ducasse

Ok so since I paid attention and rewrote all the margins: invocations I think that my changes will not break On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 9:32 PM, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Argh! I did not thought about it. > So it may means that my changes are breaking the system. > Aliaksei DNU is a ship way. The other way is as you expect I'm sure > adding a method that just does the delegation. > What we can do is to turn the DNU into a DNU compiling methods like > that after a while > we will have the method compiled and we will able to remove the DNU trick. > > stef > > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 6:46 PM, Aliaksei Syrel <alex.syrel(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> GLMRubScrolledTextBrick is a wrapper around RubScrollTextMorph. >> I see that it is a common practice in Pharo to implement decorator / wrapper >> pattern using doesNotUnderstand:. >> >> Reference: >> - AthensWrappedWorldDisplay >> - DictionaryValueHolder >> - MorphicTreeAdapter >> - RubEditingArea >> - RubParagraphDecorator >> >> - RTShapeBuilder >> - RTShowLabel >> >> Is there a better way to implement a decorator or a wrapper around the >> object with many api methods rather then doesNotUnderstand:? >> >> Cheers, >> Alex >> >> On 9 December 2017 at 17:45, Henrik-Nergaard <draagren(a)outlook.com> wrote: >>> >>> >>GLMRubScrolledTextBrick>>withoutMargins uses self margins: but I >>> cannot find the method. >>> This is because it is implemented in RubScrollTextMorph. >>> GLMRubScrolledTextBrick implements #doesNotUnderstand: to send it to the >>> rubric object. >>> see: >>> >>> https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/17888/GLMRubScrolledTextBrick-relies-on-d… >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Henrik >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html >>> >>

Dec. 16, 2017