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

Re: [Pharo-dev] Launcher and Pharo 6.1

by Esteban Lorenzano

Hi, Yes as Eliot said, it is safe. 6.1 just includes latest bug fixes from Eliot + a new version of libgit2 Esteban > On 30 Jul 2017, at 05:59, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Sean, > > >> On Jul 29, 2017, at 8:07 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com> wrote: >> >> Is it safe to replace the Launcher VM with the one required for Pharo 6.1? >> I.e. is that VM backward compatible with a Pharo 6.0 image? > > In general, Squeak/Pharo VMs are backwards compatible at least within a major version. > >> ----- >> Cheers, >> Sean >> -- >> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Launcher-and-Pharo-6-1-tp4957770.html >> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> >

July 30, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [ci-announces] IMPORTANT: Virtual Machines loss

by Volkert

Out of curiosity: What is the impact on the Pharo Project? Is the build process is interrupted? Volkert On 28.07.2017 19:18, Christophe Demarey wrote: > Dear CI users, > > Due to a manipulation error, a lot of Virtual Machines hosted on > CloudStack were destroyed and are _not recoverable_! > For the projects being impacted, there is no other solution than > recreate new VMs. Please find as attachment the list of virtual > machines that are not affected. > > Jenkins servers are not concerned by this issue, so all your jobs and > history are safe. > > We are deeply sorry for this failure. > Everything was done in an effort to retrieve the lost VMs, but it has > proven to be an impossible task and the VMs cannot be restored. We are > now working on setting up safeguards to prevent such situations. > > With our sincere apologies, > The CI team. > > >

July 30, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] Launcher and Pharo 6.1

by Eliot Miranda

Hi Sean, > On Jul 29, 2017, at 8:07 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com> wrote: > > Is it safe to replace the Launcher VM with the one required for Pharo 6.1? > I.e. is that VM backward compatible with a Pharo 6.0 image? In general, Squeak/Pharo VMs are backwards compatible at least within a major version. > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Launcher-and-Pharo-6-1-tp4957770.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >

July 30, 2017

Launcher and Pharo 6.1

by Sean P. DeNigris

Is it safe to replace the Launcher VM with the one required for Pharo 6.1? I.e. is that VM backward compatible with a Pharo 6.0 image? ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Launcher-and-Pharo-6-1-tp4957770.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

July 30, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [ANN] Pharo 6.1 (summer) released!

by Torsten Bergmann

July 29, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Ann] Calypso is moved to github

by John Brant

On 07/28/2017 08:29 AM, Denis Kudriashov wrote: > Hi Thierry > > 2017-07-28 15:01 GMT+02:00 Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com > <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com>>: > > Hi Denis, > > So it's post-refactoring that you scope, not pre-refactoring? > > post-refactoring: refactor, then restrict (scope) to what it is applied > pre-refactoring: restrict (scope) first, then refactor, then apply > > > Post/pre distinction looks strange because they both not change anything > in image. > But I understand what you are talking about. So it will be > pre-refactoring on current scope (full image by default). > And change browser will allow choose different scope which will > reevaluate refactoring again and update shown changes. I haven't been keeping up on the discussion so I may be way off... However, if you are using the scoping that is already built into the RB's refactorings, then it is pre-refactoring (i.e., they don't look at code outside the scope). BTW, if you use post-refactoring, then things like safe remove method wouldn't work since calls outside the scope would cause the refactoring to abort without removing the method. John Brant

July 29, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [ANN] Pharo 6.1 (summer) released!

by Tim Mackinnon

This is perhaps an item we can add to the "community" 7 roadmap. Surely we can all kick in something that can help automate a release with updated version numbers. And we free up time for the engineers (need a better name for this) to do harder heavy lifting for us? Tim Sent from my iPhone > On 29 Jul 2017, at 10:59, serge.stinckwich(a)gmail.com wrote: > > One of my students was confused also. > > > EnvoyÃ© de mon iPhone > >> Le 29 juil. 2017 Ã 09:50, Volkert <volkert(a)nivoba.de> a Ã©crit : >> >> >> >>> On 29.07.2017 10:39, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >>> >>>> On 29 Jul 2017, at 10:07, Volkert <volkert(a)nivoba.de> wrote: >>>> >>>> Cool. How do i figure out, if i have installed 6.1? The Welcome Page shows 6.0? >>>> >>>> i used ... >>>> wget -O- get.pharo.org/stable+vm | bash >>>> Ubuntu 16.10 >>>> LG, >>>> >>>> Volkert >>>> >>> yes, you have 6.1 >>> believe it or not, the cost of doing a âproper releaseâ (changing all numbers. etc.) is too big to do it frequently. Thatâs why we do not do this more often (also this is one of the many reasons why we are changing our process: with PR system + bootstrap, produce correct version numbers will be a lot easier). >>> >>> Esteban >>> >> better I believe you. ;-) but it is really confusing to talk about Pharo 6.1 and finding no information / notes with the release. >> >> Volkert

July 29, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [ANN] Pharo 6.1 (summer) released!

by Esteban Lorenzano

> On 29 Jul 2017, at 10:50, Volkert <volkert(a)nivoba.de> wrote: > > > > On 29.07.2017 10:39, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >> >>> On 29 Jul 2017, at 10:07, Volkert <volkert(a)nivoba.de <mailto:volkert@nivoba.de>> wrote: >>> >>> Cool. How do i figure out, if i have installed 6.1? The Welcome Page shows 6.0? >>> >>> i used ... >>> wget -O- get.pharo.org/stable+vm <http://get.pharo.org/stable+vm> | bash >>> Ubuntu 16.10 >>> LG, >>> >>> Volkert >>> >> yes, you have 6.1 >> believe it or not, the cost of doing a âproper releaseâ (changing all numbers. etc.) is too big to do it frequently. Thatâs why we do not do this more often (also this is one of the many reasons why we are changing our process: with PR system + bootstrap, produce correct version numbers will be a lot easier). >> >> Esteban >> > better I believe you. ;-) but it is really confusing to talk about Pharo 6.1 and finding no information / notes with the release. thing is: it was just a release to include iceberg 0.5 with 64bits support. people expects a lot of changes to be listed, but this is the only real change :) Esteban > > Volkert

July 29, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [ANN] Pharo 6.1 (summer) released!

by serge.stinckwich＠gmail.com

One of my students was confused also. EnvoyÃ© de mon iPhone > Le 29 juil. 2017 Ã 09:50, Volkert <volkert(a)nivoba.de> a Ã©crit : > > > >> On 29.07.2017 10:39, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: >> >>> On 29 Jul 2017, at 10:07, Volkert <volkert(a)nivoba.de> wrote: >>> >>> Cool. How do i figure out, if i have installed 6.1? The Welcome Page shows 6.0? >>> >>> i used ... >>> wget -O- get.pharo.org/stable+vm | bash >>> Ubuntu 16.10 >>> LG, >>> >>> Volkert >>> >> yes, you have 6.1 >> believe it or not, the cost of doing a âproper releaseâ (changing all numbers. etc.) is too big to do it frequently. Thatâs why we do not do this more often (also this is one of the many reasons why we are changing our process: with PR system + bootstrap, produce correct version numbers will be a lot easier). >> >> Esteban >> > better I believe you. ;-) but it is really confusing to talk about Pharo 6.1 and finding no information / notes with the release. > > Volkert

July 29, 2017

Re: [Pharo-dev] [ANN] Pharo 6.1 (summer) released!

by Volkert

On 29.07.2017 10:39, Esteban Lorenzano wrote: > >> On 29 Jul 2017, at 10:07, Volkert <volkert(a)nivoba.de >> <mailto:volkert@nivoba.de>> wrote: >> >> Cool. How do i figure out, if i have installed 6.1? The Welcome Page >> shows 6.0? >> >> i used ... >> >> wget -O- get.pharo.org/stable+vm <http://get.pharo.org/stable+vm> | bash >> >> Ubuntu 16.10 >> >> LG, >> >> Volkert >> > yes, you have 6.1 > believe it or not, the cost of doing a âproper releaseâ (changing all > numbers. etc.) is too big to do it frequently. Thatâs why we do not do > this more often (also this is one of the many reasons why we are > changing our process: with PR system + bootstrap, produce correct > version numbers will be a lot easier). > > Esteban > better I believe you. ;-) but it is really confusing to talk about Pharo 6.1 and finding no information / notes with the release. Volkert

July 29, 2017