August 2018 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #1183: 22327-Add-a-rule-to-check-the-use-of-printString-inside-printOnaStream

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #1183 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #1691 was integrated: "22327-Add-a-rule-to-check-the-use-of-printString-inside-printOnaStream" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/1691 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/22327 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Aug. 20, 2018

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #1182: 22330-PluggableSliderMorph-does-not-respect-theme-

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #1182 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #1694 was integrated: "22330-PluggableSliderMorph-does-not-respect-theme-" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/1694 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/22330 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Aug. 20, 2018

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #1181: 22346-mustBeBooleanDeOptimizeIn-needs-to-clean-semantic-annotation-before-recompile

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #1181 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #1704 was integrated: "22346-mustBeBooleanDeOptimizeIn-needs-to-clean-semantic-annotation-before-recompile" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/1704 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/22346 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Aug. 20, 2018

Pharo and Docker (some steps)

by Torsten Bergmann

For those interested in Docker: I recently played with Pharo and Docker and summarized some of my steps in a small tutorial in my Pharo wiki: http://wiki.astares.com/pharo/613 There is also a page following Mike Filonovs suggestions on the Pharo docker file: http://wiki.astares.com/pharo/615 Maybe this is useful for others too. Bye T.

Aug. 20, 2018

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #1180: 22308-Cleaning-baseClassclassClass-leftovers

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #1180 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #1689 was integrated: "22308-Cleaning-baseClassclassClass-leftovers" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/1689 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/22308 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Aug. 20, 2018

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #1179: 22338 Tag Kernel Manifests

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #1179 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #1697 was integrated: "22338 Tag Kernel Manifests" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/1697 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/22338 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Aug. 20, 2018

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #1178: 22345 Tag Manifests in IssueTracking and IssueTracking-Tests

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #1178 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #1703 was integrated: "22345 Tag Manifests in IssueTracking and IssueTracking-Tests" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/1703 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/22345 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Aug. 20, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] A new rule to implement in Pharo ?

by lionelakue

Thanks Marcus, Guille. I look at it. -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html

Aug. 20, 2018

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #1177: 22339 Cleanup canZapMethodDictionary

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #1177 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #1698 was integrated: "22339 Cleanup canZapMethodDictionary" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/1698 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/22339 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Aug. 20, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] Reducing the cost of documentation

by Torsten Bergmann

Hi Alistair, I don't think the contribution process hold people back from writing documentation since providing a contribution is easy to do now (see [1] and [2]). And (even when more cumbersome) I like the review process - as it helped several times in the past to discuss contributions or even fixing them or find trivial typos. I guess the primary problem is lazyness: people dont like to write documentation as it is always additional effort. Remember that often people do not even write a simple comment on a class to inform about the purpose it was created... I personally doubt that we increase the number and quality of the provided in-image docu with the proposal. Bye T. [1] https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/blob/development/CONTRIBUTING.md [2] https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/wiki/Contribute-a-fix-to-Pharo > Gesendet: Montag, 20. August 2018 um 08:37 Uhr > Von: "Alistair Grant" <akgrant0710(a)gmail.com> > An: "Pharo Development List" <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org> > Betreff: [Pharo-dev] Reducing the cost of documentation > > Hi Everyone, > > The topic of documentation recently came up again on the squeak list and > it made me wonder about some of the blocks that currently prevent more > contributions to in-image documentation. > > One of the things holding back the in-image documentation is that the > cost of contributing is too high: apart from actually making the change > we currently have to (maybe) open an issue, create a branch, commit and > open a PR. Someone with commit privileges then has to review the PR > enough and decide to merge it. We then need to manually delete the > branch some time later. > > This is one of the reasons that wikis have been successful, they lower > the cost of making changes. > > We could extend iceberg to automatically submit PRs for documentation > only commits (it could be a separate option, so that the doco only > requirement is enforced), and set up github to auto-accept the PR. > Modifying in-image documentation would then become a few extra clicks, > significantly lowering the cost. > > I'm not familiar with Jenkins, or any other CI system, but hunting > around google it looks like it may be possible to directly implement > this, if not there are services such as https://mergify.io/ which > advertise being able to do this by using flags in the CI to determine > whether the PR should be merged (disclaimer, I've never looked at > mergify.io, just found it while thinking about this). > > Thoughts? > > > Cheers, > Alistair > >

Aug. 20, 2018