April 2019 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

[Pharo 8.0] Build #222: Adding flags for Smalltalk reference. Refactor some direct reference â¦

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #222 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #3155 was integrated: "Adding flags for Smalltalk reference. Refactor some direct reference â¦" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3155 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/FewSmalltalkRemoval Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

April 12, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #221: MailMessage can not send mails with attachment in Pharo8

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #221 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #3167 was integrated: "MailMessage can not send mails with attachment in Pharo8" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3167 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/3164 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

April 12, 2019

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo-users] [OT] (slightly) What makes other dialects "enjoyable" for you? (WAS: difference between double dispatch...)

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

I agree with Norbert: the problem lies in the definition of LTS. Right now, Pharo 8 is the moving thing, Pharo 7 is stable and receives back ports of selected fixes. Each older Pharo version is also stable: what worked years ago, still works today. I have many Pharo 4 images running in production, they even get new application code that was developed in Pharo 7 images. LTS is also a bit of a trap: Ubuntu has it for Linux, but after 5 or 10 years you still have to move, and then it will be quite hard because you never did any small steps. We had similar problems in the Java and Javascript worlds (to name two much larger communities): one day some critical part that you depend on becomes obsolete, and then you have a problem. > On 11 Apr 2019, at 23:34, Norbert Hartl <norbert(a)hartl.name> wrote: > > > > Am 11.04.2019 um 21:35 schrieb Mariano Martinez Peck <marianopeck(a)gmail.com>: > >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 10:54 AM Norbert Hartl <norbert(a)hartl.name> wrote: >> >> >> Am 11.04.2019 um 15:29 schrieb Mariano Martinez Peck <marianopeck(a)gmail.com>: >> >>> Hi Esteban, >>> >>> We talk this privately a couple of weeks ago, but I thought it was worth writing again here. As for other IDE's being enjoyable, I can only talk about VASmalltalk. If there is ONE thing I enjoy from it, is the stability. May be ugly, may be too-windows, may be full of menus you don't understand what they do, but it's really rock solid. >>> Pharo has been doing a LOT of progress on so many areas and its expected to decrease a bit on stability. Unless you are Oracle and can hire 100 engineers. >>> So, my small recommendation to you back then was to make at least ONE release (called LTS or whatever) were you just focus on stability and bugs. No new features. No new framework. Just stability. Make it rock solid. Then after that release, you can keep moving forward, but that would give companies and really really stable Pharo to rely on. >>> >> For the provision of an LTS version we need more engineers. If there are enough companies that need a rock solid stable version then the consortium will have enough money to hire engineers for that. >> >> Well, either that or convince the community that that is a good thing. Obviously, when you don't pay for that and things come for free it's understandable you can't decide on what type of effort/results you get. And for almost all of us, is much way more cool to provide a new framework, a new tool, etc than bug fixing and testing. >> > Yes and it is ok it is that way. Peope spend their time and want to do something fun not the boring part. There might be projects which developed a culture of providing that as a value. But a general rule for open source work is âEither it is fun or it needs to be paidâ. I cannot see anything wrong with that. And I if try to think about an LTS version that is not backed up by a company I cannot come up with one quickly. > And when we discuss this topic I want to have a clearer definition of terms. To me there are âstabilityâ and âstand-stillâ mixed in the readings. Pharo provides quite a good stability while its moving. And that is IMHO the only way it can work. > And yet there is a place for an LTS. But who uses the new version then? How can you ever move because people just using the âstagnatedâ version? > > Norbert >> >> I would put a virtual machine that we can control much higher on the list of things we should have. >> >> Norbert >> >>> Best, >>> >>> -- >>> Mariano Martinez Peck >>> Email: marianopeck(a)gmail.com >>> Twitter: @MartinezPeck >>> LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mariano-mart%C3%ADnez-peck/ >> >> >> -- >> Mariano Martinez Peck >> Email: marianopeck(a)gmail.com >> Twitter: @MartinezPeck >> LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mariano-mart%C3%ADnez-peck/

April 12, 2019

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo-users] [OT] (slightly) What makes other dialects "enjoyable" for you? (WAS: difference between double dispatch...)

by ducasse

I think that everybody should read the innovator dilemna because large industry got just destroyed because they followed what their customers wanted. They customers said we want A and never B and suddenly B was cool enough and they did not want A anymore. Stef

April 12, 2019

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo-users] [OT] (slightly) What makes other dialects "enjoyable" for you? (WAS: difference between double dispatch...)

by Norbert Hartl

> Am 11.04.2019 um 21:35 schrieb Mariano Martinez Peck <marianopeck(a)gmail.com>: > > > >> On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 10:54 AM Norbert Hartl <norbert(a)hartl.name> wrote: >> >> >>> Am 11.04.2019 um 15:29 schrieb Mariano Martinez Peck <marianopeck(a)gmail.com>: >>> >>> Hi Esteban, >>> >>> We talk this privately a couple of weeks ago, but I thought it was worth writing again here. As for other IDE's being enjoyable, I can only talk about VASmalltalk. If there is ONE thing I enjoy from it, is the stability. May be ugly, may be too-windows, may be full of menus you don't understand what they do, but it's really rock solid. >>> Pharo has been doing a LOT of progress on so many areas and its expected to decrease a bit on stability. Unless you are Oracle and can hire 100 engineers. >>> So, my small recommendation to you back then was to make at least ONE release (called LTS or whatever) were you just focus on stability and bugs. No new features. No new framework. Just stability. Make it rock solid. Then after that release, you can keep moving forward, but that would give companies and really really stable Pharo to rely on. >>> >> For the provision of an LTS version we need more engineers. If there are enough companies that need a rock solid stable version then the consortium will have enough money to hire engineers for that. > > Well, either that or convince the community that that is a good thing. Obviously, when you don't pay for that and things come for free it's understandable you can't decide on what type of effort/results you get. And for almost all of us, is much way more cool to provide a new framework, a new tool, etc than bug fixing and testing. > Yes and it is ok it is that way. Peope spend their time and want to do something fun not the boring part. There might be projects which developed a culture of providing that as a value. But a general rule for open source work is âEither it is fun or it needs to be paidâ. I cannot see anything wrong with that. And I if try to think about an LTS version that is not backed up by a company I cannot come up with one quickly. And when we discuss this topic I want to have a clearer definition of terms. To me there are âstabilityâ and âstand-stillâ mixed in the readings. Pharo provides quite a good stability while its moving. And that is IMHO the only way it can work. And yet there is a place for an LTS. But who uses the new version then? How can you ever move because people just using the âstagnatedâ version? Norbert > >> I would put a virtual machine that we can control much higher on the list of things we should have. >> >> Norbert >> >>> Best, >>> >>> -- >>> Mariano Martinez Peck >>> Email: marianopeck(a)gmail.com >>> Twitter: @MartinezPeck >>> LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mariano-mart%C3%ADnez-peck/ > > > -- > Mariano Martinez Peck > Email: marianopeck(a)gmail.com > Twitter: @MartinezPeck > LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mariano-mart%C3%ADnez-peck/

April 11, 2019

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo-users] [OT] (slightly) What makes other dialects "enjoyable" for you? (WAS: difference between double dispatch...)

by ducasse

I agree with Norbert and I would love that the consortium is able to do it. Now the communittee should realize that we are in a much better position to support older release with Git. It is now easier for us to backport important bug fixes. For example there will be a new release of P7 monday or tuesday to handle the font bug. Stef

April 11, 2019

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo-users] [OT] (slightly) What makes other dialects "enjoyable" for you? (WAS: difference between double dispatch...)

by Mariano Martinez Peck

On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 10:54 AM Norbert Hartl <norbert(a)hartl.name> wrote: > > > Am 11.04.2019 um 15:29 schrieb Mariano Martinez Peck < > marianopeck(a)gmail.com>: > > Hi Esteban, > > We talk this privately a couple of weeks ago, but I thought it was worth > writing again here. As for other IDE's being enjoyable, I can only talk > about VASmalltalk. If there is ONE thing I enjoy from it, is the stability. > May be ugly, may be too-windows, may be full of menus you don't understand > what they do, but it's really rock solid. > Pharo has been doing a LOT of progress on so many areas and its expected > to decrease a bit on stability. Unless you are Oracle and can hire 100 > engineers. > So, my small recommendation to you back then was to make at least ONE > release (called LTS or whatever) were you just focus on stability and bugs. > No new features. No new framework. Just stability. Make it rock solid. Then > after that release, you can keep moving forward, but that would give > companies and really really stable Pharo to rely on. > > For the provision of an LTS version we need more engineers. If there are > enough companies that need a rock solid stable version then the consortium > will have enough money to hire engineers for that. > Well, either that or convince the community that that is a good thing. Obviously, when you don't pay for that and things come for free it's understandable you can't decide on what type of effort/results you get. And for almost all of us, is much way more cool to provide a new framework, a new tool, etc than bug fixing and testing. > I would put a virtual machine that we can control much higher on the list > of things we should have. > > Norbert > > Best, > > -- > Mariano Martinez Peck > Email: marianopeck(a)gmail.com > Twitter: @MartinezPeck > LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mariano-mart%C3%ADnez-peck/ > > -- Mariano Martinez Peck Email: marianopeck(a)gmail.com Twitter: @MartinezPeck LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mariano-mart%C3%ADnez-peck/

April 11, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #220: 3168-pharoversion-file-is-hardcoding-wrong-version

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #220 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #3169 was integrated: "3168-pharoversion-file-is-hardcoding-wrong-version" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3169 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/3168 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

April 11, 2019

[Pharo 7.0] Build #156: 3148-backport-2395-to-Pharo-70--Non-ASCII-class-and-author-names-break-SourceFileArraygetPreambleFromat-

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #156 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #3149 was integrated: "3148-backport-2395-to-Pharo-70--Non-ASCII-class-and-author-names-break-SourceFileArraygetPreambleFromat-" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3149 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/3148 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

April 11, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #219: 2975-Problem-when-you-read-an-mcz

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #219 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #3159 was integrated: "2975-Problem-when-you-read-an-mcz" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/3159 Issue Url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/issues/2975 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

April 11, 2019