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

Segmentation fault Pharo 6.1 64bit vm - Ubuntu Linux - loading Metacello dependency

by Tim Mackinnon

Hi - I just got a seg fault on my Gitlab CI server when trying to load a metacello baseline via the st command line hander. $ ./pharo Pharo.image --no-default-preferences --save --quit st loadLocal.st config.st "{'$AWS_ACCESS_KEY_ID'. '$AWS_SECRET_ACCESS_KEY'. '$AWS_DEFAULT_REGION'. '$S3_BUCKET'}" |& tee LoadLocal.log Fetched -> BaselineOfLambda-cypress.1 --- filetree:///builds/macta/PharoLambda/src [:] --- filetree:///builds/macta/PharoLambda/src Loaded -> BaselineOfLambda-cypress.1 --- filetree:///builds/macta/PharoLambda/src [:] --- filetree:///builds/macta/PharoLambda/src Loading baseline of BaselineOfLambda... Fetched -> BaselineOfAWS-ShoYoshida.12 --- github://newapplesho/aws-sdk-smalltalk:v1.10/pharo-repository [9149805:v1.10] --- github://newapplesho/aws-sdk-smalltalk:v1.10/pharo-repository Loaded -> BaselineOfAWS-ShoYoshida.12 --- github://newapplesho/aws-sdk-smalltalk:v1.10/pharo-repository [9149805:v1.10] --- github://newapplesho/aws-sdk-smalltalk:v1.10/pharo-repository Fetched -> ConfigurationOfZTimestamp-SvenVanCaekenberghe.25 --- http://mc.stfx.eu/Neo --- http://mc.stfx.eu/Neo Loaded -> ConfigurationOfZTimestamp-SvenVanCaekenberghe.25 --- http://mc.stfx.eu/Neo --- http://mc.stfx.eu/Neo Project: ZTimestamp stable [20] Fetched -> ZTimestamp-SvenVanCaekenberghe.57 --- http://mc.stfx.eu/Neo --- http://mc.stfx.eu/Neo Project: AWS baseline Segmentation fault Mon Jul 31 22:18:27 2017 /builds/macta/PharoLambda/build/pharo-vm/lib/pharo/5.0-201707201942/pharo Pharo VM version: 5.0-201707201942 Thu Jul 20 20:42:13 UTC 2017 gcc 4.6.3 [Production Spur 64-bit ITHB VM] Built from: CoInterpreter VMMaker.oscog-eem.2254 uuid: 4f2c2cce-f4a2-469a-93f1-97ed941df0ad Jul 20 2017 With: StackToRegisterMappingCogit VMMaker.oscog-eem.2252 uuid: 2f3e9b0e-ecd3-4adf-b092-cce2e2587a5c Jul 20 2017 Revision: VM: 201707201942 https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm.git $ Date: Thu Jul 20 12:42:21 2017 -0700 $ Plugins: 201707201942 https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm.git $ Build host: Linux testing-gce-2c303f4c-2b90-4f17-b8b9-ec690d977073 3.13.0-115-generic #162~precise1-Ubuntu SMP Fri Mar 24 16:47:06 UTC 2017 x86_64 x86_64 x86_64 GNU/Linux plugin path: /builds/macta/PharoLambda/build/pharo-vm/lib/pharo/5.0-201707201942 [default: /builds/macta/PharoLambda/build/pharo-vm/lib/pharo/5.0-201707201942/] C stack backtrace & registers: rax 0xa41278c0 rbx 0xa4127750 rcx 0xa4127978 rdx 0xa4127808 rdi 0xa4127528 rsi 0xa4127528 rbp 0xa4127698 rsp 0xa4127a30 r8 0xa4126f68 r9 0xa4127020 r10 0xa41270d8 r11 0xa4127190 r12 0xa4127248 r13 0xa4127300 r14 0xa41273b8 r15 0xa4127470 rip 0xa4127ae8 *[0x7fffa4127ae8] /builds/macta/PharoLambda/build/pharo-vm/lib/pharo/5.0-201707201942/pharo[0x41cd91] /builds/macta/PharoLambda/build/pharo-vm/lib/pharo/5.0-201707201942/pharo[0x41d11f] /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libpthread.so.0(+0x11670)[0x7efe11ad9670] /builds/macta/PharoLambda/build/pharo-vm/lib/pharo/5.0-201707201942/pharo[0x43645f] /builds/macta/PharoLambda/build/pharo-vm/lib/pharo/5.0-201707201942/pharo(ceBaseFrameReturn+0xc1)[0x45bec1] [0x260124e] [0x0] Smalltalk stack dump: Most recent primitives stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: basicAtLeast: basicAtLeast: new: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: compare:with:collated: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stringHash:initialHash: stack page bytes 8192 available headroom 5576 minimum unused headroom 5976 The script being run was - and it segâd on the first Metacello invocation when reading in a dependent spec. "CmdLine script to load project" | stdout | stdout := FileStream stdout wantsLineEndConversion: true; converter; yourself. "Add missing STON dependency in minimal image" Smalltalk at: #STON ifAbsent: [ stdout nextPutAll: 'Loading missing STON'; cr. Gofer new url: 'http://ss3.gemstone.com/ss/STON'; package: 'STON-Core'; load. "Fix-up issue with Undeclared not firing a change in minimal image" { MCFileTreeRepository. MCFileTreeStCypressReader. MCFileTreeAbstractReader } do: [:c | c compileAll ] ]. "Create a stub TestCase (if needed) for packages not minimally defined" Smalltalk at: #TestCase ifAbsent: [ stdout nextPutAll: 'Creating missing TestCase'; cr. Object subclass: #TestCase ]. Metacello new repository: 'filetree://../src'; baseline: 'Lambda'; load. Metacello new repository: 'filetree://../src'; baseline: 'LambdaRuntime'; load. Smalltalk at: #IceRepositoriesBrowser ifPresent: [ :i | stdout nextPutAll: 'Removing rogue ', i name; cr. i allInstances do: [:b | b become: String new ]]. Smalltalk at: #OmSessionStore ifPresent: [ :i | stdout nextPutAll: 'Unregistering ', i name; cr. SessionManager default unregisterClassNamed: i name ]. SmalltalkImage current garbageCollect.

July 31, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] Calypso browser and categories?

by Mariano Martinez Peck

On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Mariano. > > You right. Method for this was implemented but I forgot to use it in > #selectClass: logic. > I committed fix to dev branch. I will realze new version soon. > > OK, great. Let me know when you want me to test it. I am glad it was a "bug". I thought it might have been some "decision". > But I am not sure that it is only issue you are talking about. > Yeah, I figured I can see it elsewhere. But I will find them if there are other places... BTW, I also found some other small issues which I comment below. Do you want me to open issues on github for them? * "Windows" -> "Delete all windows discarding edits" -> does not close Calypso windows with none saved edits * When I have a class opened, with a method opened, then I go to the class comment tab and I save the class comment, calypso automatically gives me focus back to the "method tab" rather than staying in the class comment. This is annoying as i like to save my class comment frequently and not they flip to another tab. * I wish the "new protocol" offers me the existing ones as I type...as I normally re-use existing protocols (on purpose) and its easy to make small typos or differences with the original ones. Thoughts? Thanks! > > 2017-07-31 18:25 GMT+02:00 Mariano Martinez Peck <marianopeck(a)gmail.com>: > >> Hi Denis, >> >> I wanted to give a serious test to Calypso, that is, start using it all >> day long. However, there is a critical thing I am missing, which is the >> grouping of categories (inside packages). >> >> I do not want to start discussing again packages vs categories and what >> are good and bad practices. I do have a few packages and each package may >> have several categories inside. So... seeing all classes together inside a >> package is not nice for me. >> >> Is there a way in calypso to auto-escope to category level? I mean... say >> my package is XXX and I have categories XXX-A and XXX-B. I know I can go to >> left side column and with the tree, I can go to XXX-A and I get what I >> want. But, for example, when I browse a class of XXX-A, the "focus" of the >> left side column is XXX and not XXX-A. So I am wondering if we can make it >> auto-scope to the category everywhere in Calypso. >> >> Thanks in advance, >> >> -- >> Mariano >> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com >> > > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

July 31, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] Calypso browser and categories?

by Denis Kudriashov

Hi Mariano. You right. Method for this was implemented but I forgot to use it in #selectClass: logic. I committed fix to dev branch. I will realze new version soon. But I am not sure that it is only issue you are talking about. 2017-07-31 18:25 GMT+02:00 Mariano Martinez Peck <marianopeck(a)gmail.com>: > Hi Denis, > > I wanted to give a serious test to Calypso, that is, start using it all > day long. However, there is a critical thing I am missing, which is the > grouping of categories (inside packages). > > I do not want to start discussing again packages vs categories and what > are good and bad practices. I do have a few packages and each package may > have several categories inside. So... seeing all classes together inside a > package is not nice for me. > > Is there a way in calypso to auto-escope to category level? I mean... say > my package is XXX and I have categories XXX-A and XXX-B. I know I can go to > left side column and with the tree, I can go to XXX-A and I get what I > want. But, for example, when I browse a class of XXX-A, the "focus" of the > left side column is XXX and not XXX-A. So I am wondering if we can make it > auto-scope to the category everywhere in Calypso. > > Thanks in advance, > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com >

July 31, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] Catalog down

by Esteban Lorenzano

It will be restarted at midnight > On 31 Jul 2017, at 19:51, Torsten Bergmann <astares(a)gmx.de> wrote: > > http://catalog.pharo.org/catalog/json responds with "Service Temporarily Unavailable". > Sabine already reported it this morning on Discord. > > Any idea? > >

July 31, 2017

Catalog down

by Torsten Bergmann

http://catalog.pharo.org/catalog/json responds with "Service Temporarily Unavailable". Sabine already reported it this morning on Discord. Any idea?

July 31, 2017

Calypso browser and categories?

by Mariano Martinez Peck

Hi Denis, I wanted to give a serious test to Calypso, that is, start using it all day long. However, there is a critical thing I am missing, which is the grouping of categories (inside packages). I do not want to start discussing again packages vs categories and what are good and bad practices. I do have a few packages and each package may have several categories inside. So... seeing all classes together inside a package is not nice for me. Is there a way in calypso to auto-escope to category level? I mean... say my package is XXX and I have categories XXX-A and XXX-B. I know I can go to left side column and with the tree, I can go to XXX-A and I get what I want. But, for example, when I browse a class of XXX-A, the "focus" of the left side column is XXX and not XXX-A. So I am wondering if we can make it auto-scope to the category everywhere in Calypso. Thanks in advance, -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

July 31, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [ANN] Mustache moved to github

by Ben Coman

I found this useful to clarify my understanding of git... https://git-scm.com/book/en/v1/Git-Internals cheers -ben On Mon, Jul 31, 2017 at 5:31 PM, Tim Mackinnon <tim(a)testit.works> wrote: > So Iâm still puzzled why what I have said is incorrect - tag on master, > update your repository url to include that tag with â:tagnameâ and then > users will get that stable version when they load your baseline (vs. > Leaving it off and they get whatever you might have in progress on master. > And sure - you might develop on a branch and get it all perfect first and > then merge to master - but I still think it is good idea to tag the point > you are happy with and then update your baselineOf again?) > > Peter seems to be implying there is a different (better?) way to do this - > and Iâm wondering if Iâm missing something obvious or whether we are all > saying the same thing (me rather badly it seems) > > Tim > > On 31 Jul 2017, at 10:18, Alistair Grant <akgrant0710(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Tim, > > Perhaps a different way of phrasing it that might help is that tags are > global, not per branch. > > Checking out a commit, whether by id, tag, or Branch name implies the > entire tree. > > Cheers, > Alistair > > > On 31 Jul. 2017 11:09 am, "Tim Mackinnon" <tim(a)testit.works> wrote: > > Hi Peter - I am confused now, Iâve always understood that git tags are > used to mark important points in history. From the Git online manual - " > Tagging > > Like most VCSs, Git has the ability to tag specific points in history as > being important. Typically people use this functionality to mark release > points (v1.0, and so on). In this section, youâll learn how to list the > available tags, how to create new tags, and what the different types of > tags are. > â > > So Iâve always understood that by putting a tag on a commit, I was getting > a snapshot of the whole graph at that point in time? Thus - by specifying > the â:tag nameâ on the baseline url, you were getting that version? > > Thinking a bit more, I guess if you want to to actually make some changes > from that tag point - you do need to create a -b branch from it (otherwise > you have a detached head right?) - is this what you are getting at? > > Or is there a more obvious thing I am missing that lets you point to a > particular version in GIT? I appreciate your insight into this, as I think > we all need to learn how to do this properly. > > Tim > > On 31 Jul 2017, at 08:17, Peter Uhnak <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Nono, I don't think you fully understand git's versioning. > > To oversimplify: git's history is composed of commits and parental > relationships between them. Nothing more, nothing less; it is just a > directed acyclic graph. > > On top of this graph structure you have additional stuff like branches, > which are just labels atteched to the commits, and also tags, which are > also just labels. > > So when you tag a commit, it doesn't really matter what branch it was on, > you've simply said that tag 1.0 points to a particular commit XXXXXX in the > history; that commit could belong to master branch, or development branch, > or any other branch (or no named branch at all, also known as detached > head). > > In another words, your tag points to a commit only, and branches do not > play any role in this whatsoever. > > Am I being clear? (I'm sipping my morning coffee so my brain is not fully > operational yet ;) ) > > Peter > > > On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 05:28:44PM +0200, Tim Mackinnon wrote: > > Peter - I meant it as a figurative example - on a master branch you can > tag whenever you want right? And so you can point users to a specific tag > on master so they have a stable point to load from (possibly while you > merge a branch back to master and then update any documentation or config > before retagging and updating a BaselineOf? > > This looks like what the AWS Smalltalk git repo has used as an example. > > Tim > > (Ps > Apologies for the "rage" iOS autocorrect - apparently that's what Apple > thinks tags is corrected to ;) > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > Sent from my iPhone > On 30 Jul 2017, at 16:35, Peter Uhnak <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > If I've understood correctly, this means you can rage master with a > version number like v1.1 and then put that in the URL > > https://github.com/peteruhnak/IconFactory/tree/master:v1.1/ > > > I am not sure where you got this url from, but combining branch and tag > name makes nor sense... that's like you wanted a version 1.1 AND 2.3 (or > whatever would be the latest in master). > > (as mentioned in the syntax: branch name OR commit id OR tag id) > > Peter > > > > > > > >

July 31, 2017

Referencing Git tags/branchs/commits [Hijacked: Re: [ANN] Mustache moved to github]

by Peter Uhnak

> Iâve always understood that git tags are used to mark important points in history Correct (mark=label) > putting a tag on a commit, I was getting a snapshot of the whole graph No, there's no need to perform a snapshot of the whole graph. Commit id (the 40-bit SHA of a commit) is computed from various properties including the content of the commit and the parents, therefore if a single bit would have changed in the content, then the ID would be different. Thus you don't need to perform a whole snapshot (that would be git clone --depth=1), because knowing just the ID is enough to identify the version, content, and ancestry. Without anything else, you would work only with the SHA numbers... checking out XXXXXX, merging XXXX to YYYY, etc. As this is very annoying, you have several concepts to help you * lightweight tag --- this is literally just a text file in .git/refs/tags/tag-name that has the ID of the pointed-to commit * annotated tag --- stored again in `.git/refs/tags/tag-name`, but instead it points to an intermediate file that contains info about the person creating the tag, the tag message, etc, but not the tag content; instead the intermediate file again points to a commit ID (you can look at the content of the intermediate file in .git/objects (git cat-file to read it) * branch is a kind of a "moving tag"; in e.g. `.git/refs/heads/master` you would see the ID of the latest commit (just like a lightweight tag) So branch is in reality just the tip of the branch (the head of it), and the previous commits do not really belong to any branch. (You can see this when you merge a branch and then delete the merged branch... the commits are still there, only the label was removed.). So it would be as if you deleted a tag and created it again after each commit. > So Iâve always understood that by putting a tag on a commit, I was getting a snapshot of the whole graph at that point in time? Thus - by specifying the â:tag nameâ on the baseline url, you were getting that version? tags and branches are just labels; you could directly use :<commit sha> in the baseline with the same effect > Thinking a bit more, I guess if you want to to actually make some changes from that tag point - you do need to create a -b branch from it (otherwise you have a detached head right?) - is this what you are getting at? you don't need a branch, you can just carry on from the "detached" head > Or is there a more obvious thing I am missing that lets you point to a particular version in GIT? Yes, you can just say, I want code as it was in version <COMMIT-SHA>. To summarize: * the commit graph representation has no notion of branches or tags * you can use commit sha instead of tags/branchs * tags are just references to particular commits * branches are just like tags, only the reference changes after each commit * the data representation is very simple and straight-forward, and you can easily view it by hand (from terminal with git cat-file) in the .git folder Peter (am I making it more clear or more obscure? :-D)

July 31, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [ANN] Mustache moved to github

by Tim Mackinnon

So Iâm still puzzled why what I have said is incorrect - tag on master, update your repository url to include that tag with â:tagnameâ and then users will get that stable version when they load your baseline (vs. Leaving it off and they get whatever you might have in progress on master. And sure - you might develop on a branch and get it all perfect first and then merge to master - but I still think it is good idea to tag the point you are happy with and then update your baselineOf again?) Peter seems to be implying there is a different (better?) way to do this - and Iâm wondering if Iâm missing something obvious or whether we are all saying the same thing (me rather badly it seems) Tim > On 31 Jul 2017, at 10:18, Alistair Grant <akgrant0710(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Tim, > > Perhaps a different way of phrasing it that might help is that tags are global, not per branch. > > Checking out a commit, whether by id, tag, or Branch name implies the entire tree. > > Cheers, > Alistair > > > On 31 Jul. 2017 11:09 am, "Tim Mackinnon" <tim(a)testit.works> wrote: > Hi Peter - I am confused now, Iâve always understood that git tags are used to mark important points in history. From the Git online manual - " > Tagging > Like most VCSs, Git has the ability to tag specific points in history as being important. Typically people use this functionality to mark release points (v1.0, and so on). In this section, youâll learn how to list the available tags, how to create new tags, and what the different types of tags are. > > â > > So Iâve always understood that by putting a tag on a commit, I was getting a snapshot of the whole graph at that point in time? Thus - by specifying the â:tag nameâ on the baseline url, you were getting that version? > > Thinking a bit more, I guess if you want to to actually make some changes from that tag point - you do need to create a -b branch from it (otherwise you have a detached head right?) - is this what you are getting at? > > Or is there a more obvious thing I am missing that lets you point to a particular version in GIT? I appreciate your insight into this, as I think we all need to learn how to do this properly. > > Tim > >> On 31 Jul 2017, at 08:17, Peter Uhnak <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com <mailto:i.uhnak@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Nono, I don't think you fully understand git's versioning. >> >> To oversimplify: git's history is composed of commits and parental relationships between them. Nothing more, nothing less; it is just a directed acyclic graph. >> >> On top of this graph structure you have additional stuff like branches, which are just labels atteched to the commits, and also tags, which are also just labels. >> >> So when you tag a commit, it doesn't really matter what branch it was on, you've simply said that tag 1.0 points to a particular commit XXXXXX in the history; that commit could belong to master branch, or development branch, or any other branch (or no named branch at all, also known as detached head). >> >> In another words, your tag points to a commit only, and branches do not play any role in this whatsoever. >> >> Am I being clear? (I'm sipping my morning coffee so my brain is not fully operational yet ;) ) >> >> Peter >> >> >> On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 05:28:44PM +0200, Tim Mackinnon wrote: >>> Peter - I meant it as a figurative example - on a master branch you can tag whenever you want right? And so you can point users to a specific tag on master so they have a stable point to load from (possibly while you merge a branch back to master and then update any documentation or config before retagging and updating a BaselineOf? >>> >>> This looks like what the AWS Smalltalk git repo has used as an example. >>> >>> Tim >>> >>> (Ps >>> Apologies for the "rage" iOS autocorrect - apparently that's what Apple thinks tags is corrected to ;) >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> On 30 Jul 2017, at 16:35, Peter Uhnak <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com <mailto:i.uhnak@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>>>> >>>>> If I've understood correctly, this means you can rage master with a version number like v1.1 and then put that in the URL >>>>> >>>>>> https://github.com/peteruhnak/IconFactory/tree/master:v1.1/ <https://github.com/peteruhnak/IconFactory/tree/master:v1.1/> >>>> >>>> I am not sure where you got this url from, but combining branch and tag name makes nor sense... that's like you wanted a version 1.1 AND 2.3 (or whatever would be the latest in master). >>>> >>>> (as mentioned in the syntax: branch name OR commit id OR tag id) >>>> >>>> Peter >>>> >>> >>> >> > >

July 31, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [ANN] Mustache moved to github

by Alistair Grant

Hi Tim, Perhaps a different way of phrasing it that might help is that tags are global, not per branch. Checking out a commit, whether by id, tag, or Branch name implies the entire tree. Cheers, Alistair On 31 Jul. 2017 11:09 am, "Tim Mackinnon" <tim(a)testit.works> wrote: Hi Peter - I am confused now, Iâve always understood that git tags are used to mark important points in history. From the Git online manual - "Tagging Like most VCSs, Git has the ability to tag specific points in history as being important. Typically people use this functionality to mark release points (v1.0, and so on). In this section, youâll learn how to list the available tags, how to create new tags, and what the different types of tags are. â So Iâve always understood that by putting a tag on a commit, I was getting a snapshot of the whole graph at that point in time? Thus - by specifying the â:tag nameâ on the baseline url, you were getting that version? Thinking a bit more, I guess if you want to to actually make some changes from that tag point - you do need to create a -b branch from it (otherwise you have a detached head right?) - is this what you are getting at? Or is there a more obvious thing I am missing that lets you point to a particular version in GIT? I appreciate your insight into this, as I think we all need to learn how to do this properly. Tim On 31 Jul 2017, at 08:17, Peter Uhnak <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com> wrote: Nono, I don't think you fully understand git's versioning. To oversimplify: git's history is composed of commits and parental relationships between them. Nothing more, nothing less; it is just a directed acyclic graph. On top of this graph structure you have additional stuff like branches, which are just labels atteched to the commits, and also tags, which are also just labels. So when you tag a commit, it doesn't really matter what branch it was on, you've simply said that tag 1.0 points to a particular commit XXXXXX in the history; that commit could belong to master branch, or development branch, or any other branch (or no named branch at all, also known as detached head). In another words, your tag points to a commit only, and branches do not play any role in this whatsoever. Am I being clear? (I'm sipping my morning coffee so my brain is not fully operational yet ;) ) Peter On Sun, Jul 30, 2017 at 05:28:44PM +0200, Tim Mackinnon wrote: Peter - I meant it as a figurative example - on a master branch you can tag whenever you want right? And so you can point users to a specific tag on master so they have a stable point to load from (possibly while you merge a branch back to master and then update any documentation or config before retagging and updating a BaselineOf? This looks like what the AWS Smalltalk git repo has used as an example. Tim (Ps Apologies for the "rage" iOS autocorrect - apparently that's what Apple thinks tags is corrected to ;) Sent from my iPhone Sent from my iPhone On 30 Jul 2017, at 16:35, Peter Uhnak <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com> wrote: If I've understood correctly, this means you can rage master with a version number like v1.1 and then put that in the URL https://github.com/peteruhnak/IconFactory/tree/master:v1.1/ I am not sure where you got this url from, but combining branch and tag name makes nor sense... that's like you wanted a version 1.1 AND 2.3 (or whatever would be the latest in master). (as mentioned in the syntax: branch name OR commit id OR tag id) Peter

July 31, 2017