- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] Integration process in presence of "external" project

by Thierry Goubier

Le 22/04/2015 20:05, stepharo a Ã©crit : > >> The thing is, if you are not doing it, you're asking someone else to >> do it for you. >> >> So, some of the possibilities are: >> >> - Decouple a bit upstream from Pharo/main, not merging everything from >> there immediately. Wait to see the fixes and changes to stabilize, >> then extract and merge. >> >> - Wait for Pharo/main to pushes fixes to you upstream. So that >> Pharo/main has a duty of collecting the changes, making them all in a >> nice pack, and send them your way. >> >> A good thing is to adjust the process so that pushing things back and >> forth is easing the task of everybody involved (motivation!). >> >> For example, if an hypothetical Stef (not the true one :)) is changing >> and fixing things in Rubric inside Pharo/main, it will make merging >> Rubric newest version harder. > Why? > As a maintainer of Rubric, you know the system, its current development > status. > So you can decide when you reconcile with the Pharo version. > I would say that Pharo core hackers should not integrate changes in > external packages (only in urgence) I agree. What I said is that if Pharo core hackers do not take a bit of time to package and push upstream (i.e. to the external project) their fixes, then it will be hard for the external project maintainer to reconcile Pharo and his stream. Note that as the Rubric maintainer, if I go on holiday for three weeks, I may have to cope with a jump of around 30 to 50 versions of Pharo main to adjust too... If this happens to be the period you go on a fixing bug chase over Rubric, then the merge may be a tad challenging ;) >> So, a good thing would be to make that hypothetical Stef in charge of >> merging the new Rubric version as well. If he finds it a pain, then he >> will ease his tasks by sending his fixes nicely packaged to the Rubric >> maintainer, so that the Rubric manager can merge that with the newest >> version and send it back to Pharo/main for integration by our >> hypothetical Stef :) >> >> However, it would be allways possible for an external project to make >> it easier to fix in their project directly than in Pharo/main, but for >> that they need to be very reactive (make sure that fixes are >> propagated back very fast in Pharo/main) and make the process as easy >> as possible for an external contributor... > I do not think that putting the stress on external projects to merge > fast is good. I consider that some external projects sufficiently staffed may want to react this way. Up to them... > Because you can be in the middle of something. > Of course with a correct branch it can be simpler but we do not have > such tool right now. In fact, we do. Apart of the github/bitbucket kind of stuff, it is also possible to use smalltalkhub in that way. It's just a matter of organizing your projects and branches (with one smalltalkhub repository per branch). If you organize yourself that way, you'll end up being very close to a git / branch type of approach. Thierry

April 22, 2015

ARM Cogit

by Eliot Miranda

Hi All, thanks to hard work by Tim Rowledge and Lars Wasserman we now have a functional JIT for the ARM in the simulator. We're still probably some weeks away from a functional ARM JIT VM; issues like instruction cache flushing on real hardware can be tricky to solve. But we're at least ready to start trying to compile the JIT VM for ARM. Doug, see that I added a build directory for build.linux32ARM/squeak.cog.spur. Hopefully a fast VM for Raspberry Pi and Android is only a few weeks away. -- best, Eliot

April 22, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] QualityAssistant v0.4

by Marcus Denker

> On 22 Apr 2015, at 20:08, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr> wrote: > > NO NO NO integration in the image. > NO external tools to talk to. NO NO NO Change your mindset. But that will get quite hard: If we improve and people create more tools, then the âPharo that could beâ (with the tools loaded) will be very different from the âPharo that isâ. And nobody who downloads pharo will load additional tools. Nobody. Our goal of a modular and minimal image should not mean that Pharo itself does not come with those tools that we want people to use by default. Marcus

April 22, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] TDD and BDD

by stepharo

Christophe I do not have the answer just the constraints. This is hyper important that the solution does not change much SUnit. This way we do not end up with a mess with Sunit version. It is better to have a separate package. Stef Le 20/4/15 13:02, Christophe Demarey a Ã©crit : > Hi, > > With BDD a current test practice is to start method names with 'should'. > It is not yet possible in Pharo but easily do-able (update of TestCase and some Nautilus methods). > I would like that Pharo detects tes methods all methods of a class subclassing (directly or not) TestCase AND starting with either 'test' or 'should'. > I also would like to add 'deny' to not use 'shouldNot' but here I'm not sure. > > WDYT? > > Christophe. >

April 22, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] WhatsUp from: 2015-04-20 until: 2015-04-30

by stepharo

From what I know: the configruation of OSWindow in the repo is not loaded when there is a configuration in the image. Kind of Le 22/4/15 08:31, Tudor Girba a Ã©crit : > Could JB describe the problem with Metacello? Perhaps there is a > workaround. > > Doru > > On Tue, Apr 21, 2015 at 3:27 PM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr > <mailto:stepharo@free.fr>> wrote: > > > Hi phil > > just that you know what we are doing > > - Mathieu Lacatou an intern from Thales should be > visiting the team for > 10 days to pair program with esteban > about the OSWindow multi-windowing support > > - JB and Merwan are extending the OSWindow touch > support, like > generating scroll events > > - JB is working on Woden and adding some shadders for > 3D demoes. > > I will have a new guy from Senegal starting to work tomorrow > in my lab > on using GPU and Wooden for doing SPH&epidemiological modeling. > How to coordinate all these activities ? > > > Cool :) > I do not know > For now he should have a look at Woden, JB planned to make a CI. > But he was blocked because of a bug in the old version of > Metacello that we use. > So as soon as Metacello is updated, JB can continue his build. > > Stef > > > > > > > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com <http://www.tudorgirba.com> > > "Every thing has its own flow"

April 22, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] WhatsUp from: 2015-04-20 until: 2015-04-30

by stepharo

Le 20/4/15 21:52, Dmitri Zagidulin a Ã©crit : > I've been: > > - Rewriting/updating the Pharo driver for the Riak NoSQL database, at > https://github.com/SmalltalkZen/phriak. (It needs a tiny bit more > documentation before making a full-on mailing list announcement, though). Cool! > > - Helping out with updating the UPBE book to catch it up with the > Pharo 4.0 release. > > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 7:32 AM, Serge Stinckwich > <serge.stinckwich(a)gmail.com <mailto:serge.stinckwich@gmail.com>> wrote: > > On Mon, Apr 20, 2015 at 9:09 AM, stepharo <stepharo(a)free.fr > <mailto:stepharo@free.fr>> wrote: > > Hi phil > > > > just that you know what we are doing > > > > - Mathieu Lacatou an intern from Thales should be visiting > the team for > > 10 days to pair program with esteban > > about the OSWindow multi-windowing support > > > > - JB and Merwan are extending the OSWindow touch support, like > > generating scroll events > > > > - JB is working on Woden and adding some shadders for 3D demoes. > > I will have a new guy from Senegal starting to work tomorrow in my lab > on using GPU and Wooden for doing SPH&epidemiological modeling. > How to coordinate all these activities ? > > -- > Serge Stinckwich > UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC) > Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk > http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/ > >

April 22, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] QualityAssistant v0.4

by stepharo

NO NO NO integration in the image. NO external tools to talk to. NO NO NO Change your mindset. ConfigurationBrowser is your friend. One click and load. Or a startup preference. The configurationBrowser could have button: "add to my startupPreference." Stef Le 22/4/15 16:43, Sean P. DeNigris a Ã©crit : > Uko2 wrote >> I am developing a tool called QualityAssistant, which displays current >> critics about your code in SystemBrowser, Inspector and Spotter. > Holy crap - this tool is /Amazing/! It highlights the offending code and > even has a button to fix automatically if possible!!! +1 to integration > > > > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/QualityAssistant-v0-4-tp4821070p4821143.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >

April 22, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] Integration process in presence of "external" project

by stepharo

> The thing is, if you are not doing it, you're asking someone else to > do it for you. > > So, some of the possibilities are: > > - Decouple a bit upstream from Pharo/main, not merging everything from > there immediately. Wait to see the fixes and changes to stabilize, > then extract and merge. > > - Wait for Pharo/main to pushes fixes to you upstream. So that > Pharo/main has a duty of collecting the changes, making them all in a > nice pack, and send them your way. > > A good thing is to adjust the process so that pushing things back and > forth is easing the task of everybody involved (motivation!). > > For example, if an hypothetical Stef (not the true one :)) is changing > and fixing things in Rubric inside Pharo/main, it will make merging > Rubric newest version harder. Why? As a maintainer of Rubric, you know the system, its current development status. So you can decide when you reconcile with the Pharo version. I would say that Pharo core hackers should not integrate changes in external packages (only in urgence) > So, a good thing would be to make that hypothetical Stef in charge of > merging the new Rubric version as well. If he finds it a pain, then he > will ease his tasks by sending his fixes nicely packaged to the Rubric > maintainer, so that the Rubric manager can merge that with the newest > version and send it back to Pharo/main for integration by our > hypothetical Stef :) > > However, it would be allways possible for an external project to make > it easier to fix in their project directly than in Pharo/main, but for > that they need to be very reactive (make sure that fixes are > propagated back very fast in Pharo/main) and make the process as easy > as possible for an external contributor... I do not think that putting the stress on external projects to merge fast is good. Because you can be in the middle of something. Of course with a correct branch it can be simpler but we do not have such tool right now. > > Note that, in such a process, having good tools count. This is one of > the reasons for using places like bitbucket or github: they do really > support that kind of process (pull requests, branches, issues, > server-based merge and CI check, etc...). We could recreate that with > http repositories, but with a significant amount of work. > > Regards, > > Thierry > >> >> Cheers, >> Andrei >> >> >> Stef >> >> >> > > >

April 22, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] Integration process in presence of "external" project

by stepharo

> > Alternate process > - we do a fix we publish it in Pharo and yes this touches > Rubric and > - we integrate it in Pharo head > - then the guy from rubric merge in their trunk when they want. > it should be part of the their process to merge always > with pharo trunk > - At that point they can report a problem > - then they produce at their speed a new configuration > - then we integrate when ready their change > > > This kind of process will be a pain for those that have to merge the > changes back to their repos. > I did this for a while when I was synching the debugger repo with > Pharo and even if I only had to merge maybe one slice a day it was > kind of annoying. Andrei If we do a change that touch your project you will have to produce a configuration and merge the change anyway. Do not expect me to know what is the head of your project and what I should know. You know your project so you merge the changes we propose. Then you control the speed at which you want to release. Else I will create stupid configuration (in the sense that may be I will break something without even knowing it) and you will have to merge anyway the configurations and the package. Do not dream there is no such alternative. We should go fast to change some structural aspects and avoid to have changes that touch external packages but there is no magic Stef

April 22, 2015

Re: [Pharo-dev] Integration process in presence of "external" project

by stepharo

andrei You talk about releasing. I talk about changes that should be done on a system while people are not active. Stef Le 22/4/15 15:29, Andrei Chis a Ã©crit : > In all new tools that we did we tried to have only 2-3 packages and > use tags to organize classes in a packaged (GT-* has 9 packages for 3 > projects). > This allows for very simple configurations with clear dependencies. > Glamour has more packages (17) but those should also be reduced, as we > do not need such a low level of granularity. > > Given that support for working with multiple nested configuration is > not great we can merge all GT-* projects into one configuration. > I would still like to have different configurations for Glamour and > Rubric as they are separate projects. > So we can have just three configurations (each one for a separate > project that can be released independent of the others): > > ConfigurationOfGToolkitCore > ----> ConfigurationOfGlamourCore > ---------> ConfigurationOfRubric > > This would make releasing a new version easier with the current > support from versioner. > Releasing a version for all three configurations at once would still > require some manual updating of versions, but that's a less frequent > use-case. > > Cheers, > Andrei > > > On Wed, Apr 22, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Esteban Lorenzano > <estebanlm(a)gmail.com <mailto:estebanlm@gmail.com>> wrote: > > exactly. > what we need in the long term is a complete better integration > process. > I dream to have a git pharo project with submodules and pull requests. > > Slowly the tools are coming, but this will take time to implement. > In the mean time, we need to do all the steps we can to allow us > to achieve the modularisation goal. > Even if they look not easy because we are still building it, or > too used to previous ways of doing it. > > Esteban > > > On 22 Apr 2015, at 12:15, Pavel Krivanek > <pavel.krivanek(a)gmail.com <mailto:pavel.krivanek@gmail.com>> wrote: > > > > And do not forget that with better Pharo modularization it will > start > > to be a problem on more lower level. When eg. Morphic will be an > > "exteranal" Pharo package. > > > > -- Pavel > > > > 2015-04-22 12:03 GMT+02:00 Esteban Lorenzano > <estebanlm(a)gmail.com <mailto:estebanlm@gmail.com>>: > >> > >> On 22 Apr 2015, at 10:21, Andrei Chis > <chisvasileandrei(a)gmail.com <mailto:chisvasileandrei@gmail.com>> > wrote: > >> > >> But this only works for releasing simple configurations that do > not depend > >> on other configurations. > >> This would work for rubric, for example, but not for other > configurations we > >> have in gtools. > >> > >> > >> then you have two options: > >> > >> 1) you rewrite your configurations to not need nested > configurations. This > >> is not recommendable in huge projects like Seaside, but things > like GTools > >> are easily (I did a quick check and your 3 configurations have > in total 7 > >> packagesâ¦ would not be a problem to have them without nesting > projects and > >> just using the packages). In fact, this is how Dale recommends > using > >> configurations (if I understood him right). > >> 2) we enhance the tools to also allow the commit of nested > packages. > >> > >> I think both approaches needs to be done: you donât need > unnecessary > >> complexity in your configurations and we need to add some > nesting support to > >> commit new version. > >> > >> What is not admisible, IMO, is to do something that is wrong > just because it > >> looks easier in the short term (and I say âin short termâ > because what looks > >> easier now will generate a lot of problems in the future). > >> > >> cheers, > >> Esteban > > > > >

April 22, 2015