- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-project] So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

check the network problem. But we can release rc1 anytime now. Stef On May 16, 2010, at 11:00 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote: > Mariano, > > What is needed for Pharo 1.1? Not much I feel. I produced yesterday a Pharo1.1 from a core, and it works perfectly, including condenseChange. > > Cheers, > Alexandre > > > On 16 May 2010, at 11:14, StÃ©phane Ducasse wrote: > >> We are basically ready >> Waiting for feedback on network. >> >> Stef >> >> >> On May 16, 2010, at 3:48 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >> >>> We said that for middle May we were going to freeze 1.1. This means, no more new features or refactors. Just bug fixes. So, the next steps can be: >>> >>> - Release a PharoCore1.1 with the last version we have so far tagged as alpha1 (please, put this tag in the zip, .image and .changes). This may be, for example: Pharo-1.1-11360-alpha1.image >>> - Build and release a Pharo 1.1 alpha1 based on such core (now we have almost all dev tools working well in 1.1) >>> - Make publish all new VMs (for each OS) >>> >>> Then the idea is that people/developers start to play with Pharo 1.1. It may be quite unstable as this is the first release for 1.1. People should try to load their own packages, adapt them (if necessary) to 1.1, and report all issues they find (and fixes!!). But they should keep in mind this the first alpha ;) >>> >>> With these, we will be testing: new VMs, PharoCore, PharoDev tools, and external packages (from other people). >>> >>> Pharo team at the same time, continues to work, fixing and integrating. We make new versions as we have been doing so far. When we consider, we release an alpha2....then beta, then RC and finally Pharo 1.1. >>> >>> now...do you think there is an issue that is so important to be fixed/included in the first Pharo1.1 even being a first alpha ? >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Mariano >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

May 16, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] Managing Pharo external packages with Metacello, please read!

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

+ 1 especially on this one. > I still would like to hear the opinion of the developers that have most of the configurations. We are doing this together. If you don't agree, it will not succeed. > Yes, it is similar to Andreas post. We were thinking about this since a lot of time but without making progress. Now, with the post of Andreas, we remembered about it. And I am happy both proposal are similar. Little differences: > > - They want one only package for all confs. We want one package per configuration. Like we did in MetacelloRepository. I think it is easier to manage, less conflicts (imagine if everybody is commiting in the same package) and easier to browse. > > - They didn't say how to solve the problems with multiple version. What will they do when they have squeak 5 ? use the same package ? another one ? other repo ? > > - How do they know which version of the configuration works on the current version of squeak? So...I browse ConfigurationOfFFI, how do I know that the version 1.1.4 is the one that works in Squeak 4.1 and that the 1.2 is the one that works in Squeak 4.2 ? Of course, you can put such information inside the configuration, maybe in #description: or similar...but in all cases, you have to enter and browse the conf. We don't want that. > > - We wanted to define a standard way to load the packages on such repository: just send the message load. > > I still would like to hear the opinion of the developers that have most of the configurations. We are doing this together. If you don't agree, it will not succeed. > > What we want in summary is: is a repository of projects tested that works for a particular release of Pharo and that they all get installed in the same way. And that such installation can be executed any time in future. > > Cheers > > Mariano > > > 2010/5/16 Janko MivÅ¡ek <janko.mivsek(a)eranova.si> > Hi Stef, > > You obviously didn't read Andreas post. Please do it, it is really good > idea, which includes Metacello, it is simple and very similar to > Mariano's proposal. This means that a common solution for both Squeak > and Pharo is around a corner and that's what we all want! > > Best regards > Janko > > On 16. 05. 2010 18:26, StÃ©phane Ducasse wrote: > >> > >> I think Andreas' recent post to squeak-dev is most cogent o this topic: > > > > Eliot believe me we talk a lot of metacello since at least ESUG last year :) > > We support and appreciate dale's effort (even when people bashed metacello a while ago). > > So I think that we have a solution that looks ok for us. > > We started to see how we can manage pharoCore to produce pharoMini using metacello > > and what hamper us to remove more aggressively package is the speed of load monticello packages. > > > > Stef > > > -- > Janko MivÅ¡ek > AIDA/Web > Smalltalk Web Application Server > http://www.aidaweb.si > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

May 16, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] Managing Pharo external packages with Metacello, please read!

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

we will release 1.1 rc this week... No need to get an email about andreas to know that you do not want to mix 1.0 and 1.1 configurations. Stef On May 16, 2010, at 9:17 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > Yes, it is similar to Andreas post. We were thinking about this since a lot of time but without making progress. Now, with the post of Andreas, we remembered about it. And I am happy both proposal are similar. Little differences: > > - They want one only package for all confs. We want one package per configuration. Like we did in MetacelloRepository. I think it is easier to manage, less conflicts (imagine if everybody is commiting in the same package) and easier to browse. > > - They didn't say how to solve the problems with multiple version. What will they do when they have squeak 5 ? use the same package ? another one ? other repo ? > > - How do they know which version of the configuration works on the current version of squeak? So...I browse ConfigurationOfFFI, how do I know that the version 1.1.4 is the one that works in Squeak 4.1 and that the 1.2 is the one that works in Squeak 4.2 ? Of course, you can put such information inside the configuration, maybe in #description: or similar...but in all cases, you have to enter and browse the conf. We don't want that. > > - We wanted to define a standard way to load the packages on such repository: just send the message load. > > I still would like to hear the opinion of the developers that have most of the configurations. We are doing this together. If you don't agree, it will not succeed. > > What we want in summary is: is a repository of projects tested that works for a particular release of Pharo and that they all get installed in the same way. And that such installation can be executed any time in future. > > Cheers > > Mariano > > > 2010/5/16 Janko MivÅ¡ek <janko.mivsek(a)eranova.si> > Hi Stef, > > You obviously didn't read Andreas post. Please do it, it is really good > idea, which includes Metacello, it is simple and very similar to > Mariano's proposal. This means that a common solution for both Squeak > and Pharo is around a corner and that's what we all want! > > Best regards > Janko > > On 16. 05. 2010 18:26, StÃ©phane Ducasse wrote: > >> > >> I think Andreas' recent post to squeak-dev is most cogent o this topic: > > > > Eliot believe me we talk a lot of metacello since at least ESUG last year :) > > We support and appreciate dale's effort (even when people bashed metacello a while ago). > > So I think that we have a solution that looks ok for us. > > We started to see how we can manage pharoCore to produce pharoMini using metacello > > and what hamper us to remove more aggressively package is the speed of load monticello packages. > > > > Stef > > > -- > Janko MivÅ¡ek > AIDA/Web > Smalltalk Web Application Server > http://www.aidaweb.si > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

May 16, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] Managing Pharo external packages with Metacello, please read!

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

well... I read it before and the answer I sent to the remark of eliot is still valid. Did you realize that we think about package since we started to work on 3.9, so having a system like metacello was really what we wanted because packages without management of dependency cannot scale. Stef On May 16, 2010, at 8:47 PM, Janko MivÅ¡ek wrote: > Hi Stef, > > You obviously didn't read Andreas post. Please do it, it is really good > idea, which includes Metacello, it is simple and very similar to > Mariano's proposal. This means that a common solution for both Squeak > and Pharo is around a corner and that's what we all want! > > Best regards > Janko > > On 16. 05. 2010 18:26, StÃ©phane Ducasse wrote: >>> >>> I think Andreas' recent post to squeak-dev is most cogent o this topic: >> >> Eliot believe me we talk a lot of metacello since at least ESUG last year :) >> We support and appreciate dale's effort (even when people bashed metacello a while ago). >> So I think that we have a solution that looks ok for us. >> We started to see how we can manage pharoCore to produce pharoMini using metacello >> and what hamper us to remove more aggressively package is the speed of load monticello packages. >> >> Stef > > > -- > Janko MivÅ¡ek > AIDA/Web > Smalltalk Web Application Server > http://www.aidaweb.si > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

May 16, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)

by Alexandre Bergel

Mariano, What is needed for Pharo 1.1? Not much I feel. I produced yesterday a Pharo1.1 from a core, and it works perfectly, including condenseChange. Cheers, Alexandre On 16 May 2010, at 11:14, StÃ©phane Ducasse wrote: > We are basically ready > Waiting for feedback on network. > > Stef > > > On May 16, 2010, at 3:48 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > >> We said that for middle May we were going to freeze 1.1. This means, no more new features or refactors. Just bug fixes. So, the next steps can be: >> >> - Release a PharoCore1.1 with the last version we have so far tagged as alpha1 (please, put this tag in the zip, .image and .changes). This may be, for example: Pharo-1.1-11360-alpha1.image >> - Build and release a Pharo 1.1 alpha1 based on such core (now we have almost all dev tools working well in 1.1) >> - Make publish all new VMs (for each OS) >> >> Then the idea is that people/developers start to play with Pharo 1.1. It may be quite unstable as this is the first release for 1.1. People should try to load their own packages, adapt them (if necessary) to 1.1, and report all issues they find (and fixes!!). But they should keep in mind this the first alpha ;) >> >> With these, we will be testing: new VMs, PharoCore, PharoDev tools, and external packages (from other people). >> >> Pharo team at the same time, continues to work, fixing and integrating. We make new versions as we have been doing so far. When we consider, we release an alpha2....then beta, then RC and finally Pharo 1.1. >> >> now...do you think there is an issue that is so important to be fixed/included in the first Pharo1.1 even being a first alpha ? >> >> Cheers >> >> Mariano >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

May 16, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] Decoding bug with XMLParser ?

by Alexandre Bergel

Hi Damien, thanks, I will check your code today. cheers, Alexandre On 16 May 2010, at 13:35, Damien Pollet wrote: > Hi, > > I have a failing test to show the problem, but I can't commit to the > XMLSupport squeaksource, so I attach the MCZ here. > Basically, if I parse an UTF-8 document with an entity like … > (ellipsis), I don't get a Character with the correct #codePoint. > > Cheers, > > -- > Damien Pollet > type less, do more [ | ] http://people.untyped.org/damien.pollet > <XML-Parser-DamienPollet.75.mcz> -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

May 16, 2010

[Pharo-project] ConfigurationOfExternalWebBrowser working in Squeak and Pharo trunk

by Torsten Bergmann

Hi Sean, Why do you rerelease the ConfigurationOfExternalWebBrowser that was already working in Squeak and Pharo in an own repository and reanounce it? The ConfigurationOfExternalWebBrowser was created and is still maintained in squeaksource/MetacelloRepository ... I think this adds more confusion ... Bye T. -- GRATIS fÃ¼r alle GMX-Mitglieder: Die maxdome Movie-FLAT! Jetzt freischalten unter http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/maxdome01

May 16, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] Managing Pharo external packages with Metacello, please read!

by Mariano Martinez Peck

another cool thing is that we are going to be able to distribute a Pharo release with the correct repository as default (already added in Monticello Browser) So, in Pharo1.0 we add by default the repo Pharo10MetacelloRepository for Pharo1.1 we add Pharo11MetacelloRepository. Then, when someone wants to install something, just need to browse the repository, select what he wants, load it and then just evaluage ConfigurationOfXXX load. Cheers mariano On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 9:17 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck < marianopeck(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Yes, it is similar to Andreas post. We were thinking about this since a lot > of time but without making progress. Now, with the post of Andreas, we > remembered about it. And I am happy both proposal are similar. Little > differences: > > - They want one only package for all confs. We want one package per > configuration. Like we did in MetacelloRepository. I think it is easier to > manage, less conflicts (imagine if everybody is commiting in the same > package) and easier to browse. > > - They didn't say how to solve the problems with multiple version. What > will they do when they have squeak 5 ? use the same package ? another one ? > other repo ? > > - How do they know which version of the configuration works on the current > version of squeak? So...I browse ConfigurationOfFFI, how do I know that the > version 1.1.4 is the one that works in Squeak 4.1 and that the 1.2 is the > one that works in Squeak 4.2 ? Of course, you can put such information > inside the configuration, maybe in #description: or similar...but in all > cases, you have to enter and browse the conf. We don't want that. > > - We wanted to define a standard way to load the packages on such > repository: just send the message load. > > I still would like to hear the opinion of the developers that have most of > the configurations. We are doing this together. If you don't agree, it will > not succeed. > > What we want in summary is: is a repository of projects tested that works > for a particular release of Pharo and that they all get installed in the > same way. And that such installation can be executed any time in future. > > Cheers > > Mariano > > > 2010/5/16 Janko MivÅ¡ek <janko.mivsek(a)eranova.si> > > Hi Stef, >> >> You obviously didn't read Andreas post. Please do it, it is really good >> idea, which includes Metacello, it is simple and very similar to >> Mariano's proposal. This means that a common solution for both Squeak >> and Pharo is around a corner and that's what we all want! >> >> Best regards >> Janko >> >> On 16. 05. 2010 18:26, StÃ©phane Ducasse wrote: >> >> >> >> I think Andreas' recent post to squeak-dev is most cogent o this topic: >> > >> > Eliot believe me we talk a lot of metacello since at least ESUG last >> year :) >> > We support and appreciate dale's effort (even when people bashed >> metacello a while ago). >> > So I think that we have a solution that looks ok for us. >> > We started to see how we can manage pharoCore to produce pharoMini using >> metacello >> > and what hamper us to remove more aggressively package is the speed of >> load monticello packages. >> > >> > Stef >> >> >> -- >> Janko MivÅ¡ek >> AIDA/Web >> Smalltalk Web Application Server >> http://www.aidaweb.si >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > >

May 16, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] Managing Pharo external packages with Metacello, please read!

by Mariano Martinez Peck

2010/5/16 Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda(a)gmail.com> > > I think Andreas' recent post to squeak-dev<http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2010-May/150658.html>is most cogent o this topic: > > why ? > >> Thanks >> >> Mariano >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >

May 16, 2010

Re: [Pharo-project] Managing Pharo external packages with Metacello, please read!

by Mariano Martinez Peck

Yes, it is similar to Andreas post. We were thinking about this since a lot of time but without making progress. Now, with the post of Andreas, we remembered about it. And I am happy both proposal are similar. Little differences: - They want one only package for all confs. We want one package per configuration. Like we did in MetacelloRepository. I think it is easier to manage, less conflicts (imagine if everybody is commiting in the same package) and easier to browse. - They didn't say how to solve the problems with multiple version. What will they do when they have squeak 5 ? use the same package ? another one ? other repo ? - How do they know which version of the configuration works on the current version of squeak? So...I browse ConfigurationOfFFI, how do I know that the version 1.1.4 is the one that works in Squeak 4.1 and that the 1.2 is the one that works in Squeak 4.2 ? Of course, you can put such information inside the configuration, maybe in #description: or similar...but in all cases, you have to enter and browse the conf. We don't want that. - We wanted to define a standard way to load the packages on such repository: just send the message load. I still would like to hear the opinion of the developers that have most of the configurations. We are doing this together. If you don't agree, it will not succeed. What we want in summary is: is a repository of projects tested that works for a particular release of Pharo and that they all get installed in the same way. And that such installation can be executed any time in future. Cheers Mariano 2010/5/16 Janko MivÅ¡ek <janko.mivsek(a)eranova.si> > Hi Stef, > > You obviously didn't read Andreas post. Please do it, it is really good > idea, which includes Metacello, it is simple and very similar to > Mariano's proposal. This means that a common solution for both Squeak > and Pharo is around a corner and that's what we all want! > > Best regards > Janko > > On 16. 05. 2010 18:26, StÃ©phane Ducasse wrote: > >> > >> I think Andreas' recent post to squeak-dev is most cogent o this topic: > > > > Eliot believe me we talk a lot of metacello since at least ESUG last year > :) > > We support and appreciate dale's effort (even when people bashed > metacello a while ago). > > So I think that we have a solution that looks ok for us. > > We started to see how we can manage pharoCore to produce pharoMini using > metacello > > and what hamper us to remove more aggressively package is the speed of > load monticello packages. > > > > Stef > > > -- > Janko MivÅ¡ek > AIDA/Web > Smalltalk Web Application Server > http://www.aidaweb.si > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >

May 16, 2010