- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

[Pharo 8.0] Build #60: 2474-Cleaning-printing-protocols

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #60 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #2475 was integrated: "2474-Cleaning-printing-protocols" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/2475 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/2474 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Feb. 9, 2019

Re: [Pharo-dev] Roadmap for Pharo 8.0

by Paul DeBruicker

Hi - Looks interesting. Is sista still a thing that is in the pipeline? Thanks for all your effort. Paul EstebanLM wrote > Hi list, > > We started Pharo 8.0 development and we wanted to share (and discuss, if > needed) what is our current Roadmap for Pharo 8.0. > As you can see, Windows is getting some love, and also UI. > Anyway, here it is: > > Image > === > 1) Missing parts for headless VM to work (explained a bit later) > 2) We need to improve Epicea speed. And in general, source access speed. > We want to remove the old changes file (since Epicea already does that > works and a lot more). > 3) Improve Refactors > 4) Improve Calypso > 5) Introduce Spec2 (our re-work on this framework). > - We also want to migrate our tools to it (Inspector, Debugger, Spotter > and Calypso are the remaining parts). We will see how much of this > migration can be done. > > VM/Low-level side > === > 1) headless vm > We want to have a real headless VM and make it our default VM. > To it, most of the work vm-side is already made by Ronie, but there are > missing parts: > - a build on windows > - image side capabilities: we use SDL2 to start the world, and it mostly > works... but not completely. > > One cool thing of this is that we will -finally- be able to clean the > event handling, which is ugly (and works bad). > > 2) Windows several missing/non working parts: > - file primitives are slow. This is because they rely in old APIs and we > need to put them in "state of the art". > - libgit2 does not processes long paths. We workarounded the problem with > tonel, but at a point we need to take care about this. Real problem with > this is we need to contribute the solution to libgit2, but this is also > good Open Source policy (contributing back). > - OSSubprocess in windows. We believe we need to extend OSSubprocess (our > solution to communicate with system) to windows. And we believe is > possible ;) > > 3) ThreadedFFI. > It is already too much time since we have this in agenda. Is time to make > it real. > > 4) memory policies. > Tweaking the VM to enhance its memory usage is possible, but hard. We want > to adopt an scheme of "memory policies" that will allow users to pick what > they need. > > Process > === > 1) We will add multiple source directories to Iceberg. This is needed to > allow us to put all Pharo sub-projects into an unique project without > breaking modularisations. > > Others > === > 1) Launcher > - Launcher us getting a new UI > - Tests > - It needs to be more solid (in part, that's the reason why we want > OSSubprocess in windows). > 2) Cargo > - We need to revisit cargo (a new dependency manager) and at a point > decide if it will fly or not :) > > Nice to have (most probably not this version, but in our TODO) : > - embedded VM > - event driven VM > - what happens if we split VM into main thread and vm thread? -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html

Feb. 8, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #59: 2441-Less-Smalltalk-ui-theme-Part-1

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #59 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #2473 was integrated: "2441-Less-Smalltalk-ui-theme-Part-1" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/2473 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/2441 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Feb. 8, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #58: 2294-Halt-on-count-logic-fix

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #58 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #2281 was integrated: "2294-Halt-on-count-logic-fix" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/2281 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/HaltOnCountFix Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Feb. 8, 2019

Re: [Pharo-dev] Roadmap for Pharo 8.0

by Sean P. DeNigris

NorbertHartl wrote > On the one hand we could benefit from powerful code documentation. But > this could conflict with the minimum image we provide where people work on > and these tools would be missing. Yes, this can be a complex problem. For me the key question is what's the point of having a Dynabook if we can't even use it ourselves as developers?! However, isn't the use case for the minimum image more for deployment? I would think that most devs would/could work in the full image and then deploy to the minimal, where interactive documentation would be presumably less important. Also IIUC, in GT the interactive documentation is just pillar underneath and so could be read in static form even if the UI engine wasn't present e.g. as class comments. Also, it seems the full docs should be loadable onto minimal if needed, no? OT: I was happy to see the recent announcement of a GH-based project catalog, but at the same time was disappointed to see it seemingly implemented as text. I wasn't going to say anything because I didn't want to complain about a nice gift, but since this subject is mildly related, I'll just mention that IMHO it makes much more sense to have something that is a static dump of a dynamic system like the Pharo Catalog than to have two competing systems - one live and one not. ----- Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html

Feb. 8, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #57: Fix Year>>firstThursday

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #57 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #2454 was integrated: "Fix Year>>firstThursday" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/2454 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/fix Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Feb. 8, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #56: 2462-Remove-GLMWizard

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #56 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #2463 was integrated: "2462-Remove-GLMWizard" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/2463 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/2462 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Feb. 8, 2019

[Pharo 8.0] Build #55: 2460-Update-manually-resolved-dependencies-of-Collections-Tests

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #55 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #2461 was integrated: "2460-Update-manually-resolved-dependencies-of-Collections-Tests" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/2461 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/2460 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Feb. 8, 2019

Re: [Pharo-dev] Roadmap for Pharo 8.0

by Tim Mackinnon

+1 (with proviso there is that minimal image you can use to build up from) > On 8 Feb 2019, at 15:57, Norbert Hartl <norbert(a)hartl.name> wrote: > > > >> Am 08.02.2019 um 16:47 schrieb Serge Stinckwich <serge.stinckwich(a)gmail.com <mailto:serge.stinckwich@gmail.com>>: >> >> >> >> On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 4:41 PM Alexandre Bergel via Pharo-dev <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org <mailto:pharo-dev@lists.pharo.org>> wrote: >> Dear All, >> >> At the consortium meeting we discussed the possibility to have a mini-Roassal included in Pharo8. Many opportunities exist: displaying graph of commits in iceberg, displaying UML within the code browser, visualizing dependencies between packages. >> >> We are motivated about it, and we should produce a runnable proposal ready to be evaluated by the community within a couple of months. >> Does it make sense? Any thought about it? Do you have a wishlist? >> >> >> I will not be be strongly against it because I see benefits, but IHMO we need to reduce the size of Pharo image. >> Might be interesting to have charts included in the base. >> A+ >> > I donât agree. Why should we reduce the size of the default image? It should show a lot of things you can do with pharo. As everything is loaded from bootstrap we can have now every size of the image we want. I would rather see an official minimal image that people will download for building their software. But the development should contain everything that eases development and shows what pharo can do. > The critical border to me is what we provide in documentation. On the one hand we could benefit from powerful code documentation. But this could conflict with the minimum image we provide where people work on and these tools would be missing. > > Norbert > >> -- >> Serge Stinckwich >> Int. Research Unit on Modelling/Simulation of Complex Systems (UMMISCO) >> Sorbonne University (SU) >> French National Research Institute for Sustainable Development (IRD) >> University of YaoundÃ© I, Cameroun >> "Programs must be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute." >> https://twitter.com/SergeStinckwich <https://twitter.com/SergeStinckwich> >

Feb. 8, 2019

Re: [Pharo-dev] Roadmap for Pharo 8.0

by Norbert Hartl

> Am 08.02.2019 um 16:47 schrieb Serge Stinckwich <serge.stinckwich(a)gmail.com>: > > > > On Fri, Feb 8, 2019 at 4:41 PM Alexandre Bergel via Pharo-dev <pharo-dev(a)lists.pharo.org <mailto:pharo-dev@lists.pharo.org>> wrote: > Dear All, > > At the consortium meeting we discussed the possibility to have a mini-Roassal included in Pharo8. Many opportunities exist: displaying graph of commits in iceberg, displaying UML within the code browser, visualizing dependencies between packages. > > We are motivated about it, and we should produce a runnable proposal ready to be evaluated by the community within a couple of months. > Does it make sense? Any thought about it? Do you have a wishlist? > > > I will not be be strongly against it because I see benefits, but IHMO we need to reduce the size of Pharo image. > Might be interesting to have charts included in the base. > A+ > I donât agree. Why should we reduce the size of the default image? It should show a lot of things you can do with pharo. As everything is loaded from bootstrap we can have now every size of the image we want. I would rather see an official minimal image that people will download for building their software. But the development should contain everything that eases development and shows what pharo can do. The critical border to me is what we provide in documentation. On the one hand we could benefit from powerful code documentation. But this could conflict with the minimum image we provide where people work on and these tools would be missing. Norbert > -- > Serge Stinckwich > Int. Research Unit on Modelling/Simulation of Complex Systems (UMMISCO) > Sorbonne University (SU) > French National Research Institute for Sustainable Development (IRD) > University of YaoundÃ© I, Cameroun > "Programs must be written for people to read, and only incidentally for machines to execute." > https://twitter.com/SergeStinckwich <https://twitter.com/SergeStinckwich>

Feb. 8, 2019