- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] Iceberg goodness plus ideas

by Ben Coman

On Sun, 9 Sep 2018 at 23:06, Ben Coman <btc(a)openinworld.com> wrote: > d. In [D], its not clear the difference between: > "Discard local changes" > "Discard image changes" > Sorry, disregard [d.]. I missed that I could click on these to get a description. cheers -ben

Sept. 9, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] Iceberg goodness plus ideas

by Ben Coman

I found a related issue https://github.com/pharo-vcs/iceberg/issues/762 and attached there the pic I left off the previous post. cheers -ben On Sun, 9 Sep 2018 at 23:06, Ben Coman <btc(a)openinworld.com> wrote: > First, kudos to Iceberg team for detecting the mistake I made messing > around at the command line under the feet of an Iceberg managed repo. > I'm interested in some general discussion of a few ideas before logging > any issues. > > I had an Iceberg managed repo branch "ready-multiple-commands" > as shown at [A] in the attached pic. > (note that this is "exercism/pharo" not "pharo-project/pharo") > > I wanted to compare "git log --graph" between a few branches > so I jumped into a command prompt and did so. Along the way I changed > branch to "master" from the command line [B]. > Then friends arrived and it was six hours until I got back to it > and was presented with "Detached Working Copy" [C], > and I'd forgotten what I'd done. > > Repair repository [D] didn't make this immediately obvious > although given the two commits after a while I managed to work it out > and simply `git checkout ready-multiple-commands` at the command line > fixed things, returning the display to [A]. > > So the discussion points I'm interested in are: > > a. An extra column "Image Branch" with the existing column > renamed "Disk Branch" would have made my mistake immediately obvious. > > b. Such under the covers command line operation may be a corner case(??), > so if not an extra column, a red Status message "Image Branch > ready-multiple-commands" or similar would have helped. > > c. In the first paragraph of [D] it was not apparent what "working copy" > and "repository commit" referred to (although after a while I worked it out > from the given commit hashes -- the former was in-Image and the latter > on-disk. But the files on disk are a "working copy" in all other git > documentation and it invites confusion not to refer to it like that. It > seems to me we deal with two working copies: an "image working copy" and a > "disk working copy". That terminology would have eased discovery of my > mistake. > > d. Instead of the commit hashes [D], is it feasible to match those to > branches/tags and display those. That would have made my mistake more > obvious. > > d. In [D], its not clear the difference between: > "Discard local changes" > "Discard image changes" > > cheers -ben >

Sept. 9, 2018

Iceberg goodness plus ideas

by Ben Coman

First, kudos to Iceberg team for detecting the mistake I made messing around at the command line under the feet of an Iceberg managed repo. I'm interested in some general discussion of a few ideas before logging any issues. I had an Iceberg managed repo branch "ready-multiple-commands" as shown at [A] in the attached pic. (note that this is "exercism/pharo" not "pharo-project/pharo") I wanted to compare "git log --graph" between a few branches so I jumped into a command prompt and did so. Along the way I changed branch to "master" from the command line [B]. Then friends arrived and it was six hours until I got back to it and was presented with "Detached Working Copy" [C], and I'd forgotten what I'd done. Repair repository [D] didn't make this immediately obvious although given the two commits after a while I managed to work it out and simply `git checkout ready-multiple-commands` at the command line fixed things, returning the display to [A]. So the discussion points I'm interested in are: a. An extra column "Image Branch" with the existing column renamed "Disk Branch" would have made my mistake immediately obvious. b. Such under the covers command line operation may be a corner case(??), so if not an extra column, a red Status message "Image Branch ready-multiple-commands" or similar would have helped. c. In the first paragraph of [D] it was not apparent what "working copy" and "repository commit" referred to (although after a while I worked it out from the given commit hashes -- the former was in-Image and the latter on-disk. But the files on disk are a "working copy" in all other git documentation and it invites confusion not to refer to it like that. It seems to me we deal with two working copies: an "image working copy" and a "disk working copy". That terminology would have eased discovery of my mistake. d. Instead of the commit hashes [D], is it feasible to match those to branches/tags and display those. That would have made my mistake more obvious. d. In [D], its not clear the difference between: "Discard local changes" "Discard image changes" cheers -ben

Sept. 9, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] Pharo and Docker (some steps)

by Pierce Ng

On Mon, Aug 20, 2018 at 03:10:58PM +0200, Torsten Bergmann wrote: > I recently played with Pharo and Docker and summarized some of my > steps in a small tutorial in my Pharo wiki: Monkey saw, and monkey did. :-) Here's my report on my experimentation: http://www.samadhiweb.com/blog/2018.09.09.docker.html Pierce

Sept. 9, 2018

Added Pharo8 milestone to issue tracker

by Marcus Denker

Hi, As part of getting ready for the release, we should check all issue tracker entries tagged for pharo7 and decide if they are real show stoppers. I added a Pharo8 Milestone (but when removing the pharo7 milestone, it is in most cases better to just put it on âLaterâ). Marcus

Sept. 9, 2018

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #1239: 22434 Cleanup FloatTest

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #1239 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #1783 was integrated: "22434 Cleanup FloatTest" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/1783 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/22434 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Sept. 8, 2018

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #1238: 22404-NECSymbolCache-is-not-needed-anymore

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #1238 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #1769 was integrated: "22404-NECSymbolCache-is-not-needed-anymore" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/1769 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/22404 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Sept. 8, 2018

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #1237: 22422 Correctly deprecate Ring- Core-Kernel and Ring Tests Kernel

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #1237 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #1773 was integrated: "22422 Correctly deprecate Ring- Core-Kernel and Ring Tests Kernel" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/1773 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/22422 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

Sept. 7, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] [Pharo-users] [Moose-dev] Pharo eye-candy: Domain-Specific Modeling and Simulation

by Nick Papoylias

Thanx Alex :) Looking forward to the Roassal talk on Thursday ! On Fri, Sep 7, 2018 at 5:22 PM Alexandre Bergel via Pharo-users < pharo-users(a)lists.pharo.org> wrote: > Wow!!!!! > You guys rock! > > Alexandre > -- > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > On Sep 6, 2018, at 2:17 PM, Nick Papoylias <npapoylias(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > A nice example of how Pharo can be used for > domain-specific modeling and simulation. Short > session from one of our projects at Rochelle: > > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z7wJNhAIaVQ > > Some additional info here: https://goo.gl/jS4NjB > > Currently investigating how to incorporate the new Bloc based > widgets of @feenkcom into the workflow. > > Cheers, > > Nick > _______________________________________________ > Moose-dev mailing list > Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch > https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev > > >

Sept. 7, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] Release test for unused temps and other

by Torsten Bergmann

Thank you all for your feedback - so let's do it with a TestCase added into the image. PR is available, according CI is green and ready for review/integration: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/1782 Â

Sept. 7, 2018