- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] Do we kill the catalog?

by Esteban Lorenzano

> On 20 Apr 2018, at 12:20, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Le 20/04/2018 Ã 11:44, Esteban Lorenzano a Ã©crit : >>> On 20 Apr 2018, at 11:01, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> >>> Le 20/04/2018 Ã 09:09, Stephane Ducasse a Ã©crit : >>>> The underlying questions (sorry for people that need subtitles) are: >>>> - how do we have a central place to declare projects >>>> - right now in Smalltalkhub/list is a nice way to find projects >>>> with the move to github >>>> we should get a central place >>> >>> One of the issues I have with the Catalog is that it made a mess of the various MetaRrepo for Pharo... Showing in the end that the single place one should put a ConfigurationOf for Pharo is the squeak meta repo. >> not really. >> if you put your project in the squeak meta repo it will not even be listed (is old stuff and we are not listing those). >> the idea was to add a project in its corresponding development repo. But is an uncomfortable way, yes (and it was a patch, not meant to last) > > And is it still in? Why then, on Pharo 7, is Catalog fetching SmaCC in the Pharo5 meta repo? > >>> That in addition the Catalog doesn't even use the best package management we have at a given point is just salt rubbed in the wound. >> thatâs a one method change. Instead: >> loadConfiguration >> Gofer it >> url: self repositoryUrl; >> configurationOf: self name; >> load >> loadConfiguration >> Metacello new >> repository: self repositoryUrl; >> configuration: self name; >> load. > > Good point. Why wasn't it done? > > I thought the choice of Gofer was on purpose, since other configurations loaded in the image in the official build are done in the same way (i.e. not Metacello). not true. It is not possible to load configurations without metacello. > > On a more general point, this is a question to me. How does the Pharo team, not using the project manager in its build process, intend to properly define a project manager? What are you calling âthe project managerâ ? > >> when I made catalog, Metacello usage was not so expanded. >> Yetâ¦ gofer will use metacello to load so, yes, it will use the best package management we have at the moment. > > Hum, for me Metacello uses Gofer for loading. Not the reverse. (i.e. Metacello preps a spec, set up the repositories right including downloading, then ask Gofer to execute). Easy proof: when loaded via Metacello, Metacello registers the load (spec used, etc...); loaded via Gofer, nothing (i.e. you don't even know which spec was used in the configuration to load the packages). > > Please feel free to disprove. Gofer uses metacello to load configurations. Metacello then uses Gofer to load packages. If through Gofer there is not registration, then is a bug of Metacello. It is not possible for Pharo to load configurations without metacello. > >>>> Christophe has been working on project repository and we should check >>>> what he has. >>>> @Christophe? >>>> - how do we make sure that we can validated (I can load this version >>>> of XMLParser in that version of Pharo) >>>> -- in this version of Pharo what is the latest working version of this package >>>> - if people do not maintain/add "configuration" into the catalog what >>>> is the point? >>>> -- How can we ease the participation to the catalog? Esteban I do not >>>> care about the format. >>>> Do you think that editing STON is easier than a class? I think that we >>>> should have a button. >>>> Look people do not care about posting their project into the repo. >>>> May be we need a crawler? >>> >>> That would be an interesting concept, and maybe the right one, if the alternative is updating a cryptic JSON format each time you commit something in your project. >> very unlikely. >> a spec made in STON you just have to modify it each time you do a release (which is exactly what you have to do now with configurations). >> A crawler will not handle the need to publish a released version. >> one STON file as I imagine would be something like: >> project { >> ânameâ : "blah", >> âurlâ : "http://github.com/someone/blah", >> âlastVersionâ : âv1.0.0", >> âdescriptionâ : âSome project description" >> } > >> and maybe a couple more. Howâs that cryptic? >> maybe you are confusing things? > > No. > > Just write that ston now for the current state of OSProcess (with all versions and platforms supported). yes, you are confusing things. you do not need to explicit anything of that :) - you describe a project location and a version. You do not describe the project itself: thatâs the work of a baseline. - You also do not describe a version: Thatâs a tag (or a branch). The baseline (or baseline spec) in that branch describes the project in that moment. when you release, you say: hey, Iâm giving you version X. Not more than that. > > Or write that ston for a project that has stable branches for all pharo versions, from say 1.3 to now. why? letâs suppose you want compatibility: project { ânameâ : "blah", âurlâ : "http://github.com/someone/blah <http://github.com/someone/blah>", âversionsâ : { #pharoLatest : âv7.0.0â; #pharo6 : âv6.0.0â; #pharo5 : âv5.0.0â; #pharo4 : âv4.0.0â; #pharo3 : âv3.0.0â; #âgemstone3.30' : âv5.0.0â; }, âdescriptionâ : âSome project description" } againâ¦ whatâs cryptic or complicated there, more than what you already do in a baseline? Why is clearer in a baseline? > But, in a way, please do the way you like, and, well, a few years down the line, we're back at the same situation as now. > > Not that I wish it, but I can see when someone is solving a problem with yet another way of having the problem. Describing a project in a way that can be managed without needing to load a package into the image is another problem. A problem that is present since a lot and Dale and me talked a lot of times on how to fix it. Having a STON with a spec of the baseline is an easy and clear way. but that has nothing to do with storing releases in a discoverable way. right now you need to create a new version on a configuration and copy that package into a metacello repository. if you want to make them appear properly in catalog, you also need to implement some âcrypticâ methods nobody does it right the first time. Esteban > > Thierry > >>>> @Peter no cargo is not dead now christophe cannot fix all the time the >>>> PharoLauncher and make progress >>>> on Cargo -> Pakbot >>>> And yes I really want to have something that we can use soon. >>>> - Needed immediate actions: >>>> -- support baselineOf >>>> -- how could we make sure that we can publish in multiple repo? (After >>>> this is just a copy so I click on the package >>>> and say copy to). >>>> What else. >>>> @thierry the story I do not use the catalog because the icons are not >>>> understandable is not really good to me. >>> >>> As you wish. I know it belongs to one of these GUIs where I have to spend 10 minutes to try to remember what the icons mean. But that's just me. >>> >>> The key point to me is that the Catalog should reduce the friction it creates, not that the Catalog has to be a perfect solution. >>> >>> For example, do user-stories on it: how do one publish and updates a project on the Catalog? What has one to do in CI to ensure a project is validated ... Can the catalog just takes care of that part, if the project has a correct setup (project has tests visible in the configurationOf, catalog does the CI stuff of testing it upon each new release of Pharo, even stable because Iceberg breaks stuff when updated in Pharo 6.1, for example). Tags for Pharo versions are only granted if project has been tested on CI by the Catalog for the current version image you're in, for example. >>> >>> We know how to explore and manipulate project specs already; look into the GT tools for the code, and I also use a variant in my AltBrowser when I sort all packages under the configuration or baseline they are specified in. >>> >>> In short, make it so that the Catalog is low friction and bring value to both project maintainers and users. >>> >>> Thierry >>> >>>> Stef >>>> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 8:46 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com <mailto:estebanlm@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>> why to kill it? >>>>> right now we do not have a replacement. >>>>> >>>>> Esteban >>>>> >>>>>> On 19 Apr 2018, at 08:42, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com <mailto:stepharo.self@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi guys >>>>>> >>>>>> What do we do with it? >>>>>> What alternatives? >>>>>> >>>>>> Stef >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>> >>> > >

April 20, 2018

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #787: 21652-Smalltalk-allClassesAndTraits-duplicates-all-traits

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #787 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #1227 was integrated: "21652-Smalltalk-allClassesAndTraits-duplicates-all-traits" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/1227 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/21652 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

April 20, 2018

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #786: 21745-Trait-new-should-raise-error-instead-of-VM-crash

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #786 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #1229 was integrated: "21745-Trait-new-should-raise-error-instead-of-VM-crash" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/1229 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/21745 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

April 20, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] Do we kill the catalog?

by Sean P. DeNigris

Thierry Goubier wrote > how do one publish and updates a project on the Catalog? What has one to > do in CI to ensure a project is validated To get started, it might be helpful to provide some snippets that people can insert into their own project's CI for this. I'll do a spike when I have a momentâ¦ ----- Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html

April 20, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] Do we kill the catalog?

by Cyril Ferlicot D.

Le 20/04/2018 Ã 11:44, Esteban Lorenzano a Ã©critÂ : > > >> On 20 Apr 2018, at 11:01, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com >> <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Le 20/04/2018 Ã 09:09, Stephane Ducasse a Ã©critÂ : >>> The underlying questions (sorry for people that need subtitles) are: >>> - how do we have a central place to declare projects >>> Â Â Â Â - right now in Smalltalkhub/list is a nice way to find projects >>> with the move to github >>> Â Â Â Â we should get a central place >> >> One of the issues I have with the Catalog is that it made a mess of >> the various MetaRrepo for Pharo... Showing in the end that the single >> place one should put a ConfigurationOf for Pharo is the squeak meta repo. > > not really.Â > if you put your project in the squeak meta repo it will not even be > listed (is old stuff and we are not listing those). > > the idea was to add a project in its corresponding development repo. But > is an uncomfortable way, yes (and it was a patch, not meant to last) > >> That in addition the Catalog doesn't even use the best package >> management we have at a given point is just salt rubbed in the wound. > > thatâs a one method change. Instead:Â > > loadConfigurationÂ > Gofer itÂ > url: self repositoryUrl; > configurationOf: self name; > load > > loadConfigurationÂ > Metacello newÂ > repository: self repositoryUrl; > configuration: self name; > load. > > when I made catalog, Metacello usage was not so expanded.Â > Yetâ¦ gofer will use metacello to load so, yes, it will use the best > package management we have at the moment. > Hi, Except if it changed recently, Gofer does not use Metacello behind. At Synectique when I tried to clean all our configurations because it was really hard to update them, I found some problems in the configurations but the projects were loading. The reasons was that we used Gofer and the bugs of gofer compensated the problems in the configurations. After switching to Metacello the projects did not load anymore and I needed to fix the configurations to make them clean. So, if it worked with Gofer but not Metacello, I doubt Gofer use Metacello. > > very unlikely. > a spec made in STON you just have to modify it each time you do a > release (which is exactly what you have to do now with configurations). > > A crawler will not handle the need to publish a released version. > > one STON file as I imagine would be something like:Â > > project { > ânameâ : "blah", > âurlâ : "http://github.com/someone/blah", > âlastVersionâ : âv1.0.0", > âdescriptionâ : âSome project description" > } > > and maybe a couple more. Howâs that cryptic? > maybe you are confusing things? > > -- Cyril Ferlicot https://ferlicot.fr

April 20, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] Do we kill the catalog?

by Thierry Goubier

Le 20/04/2018 Ã 11:44, Esteban Lorenzano a Ã©critÂ : > > >> On 20 Apr 2018, at 11:01, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com >> <mailto:thierry.goubier@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> Le 20/04/2018 Ã 09:09, Stephane Ducasse a Ã©critÂ : >>> The underlying questions (sorry for people that need subtitles) are: >>> - how do we have a central place to declare projects >>> Â Â Â Â - right now in Smalltalkhub/list is a nice way to find projects >>> with the move to github >>> Â Â Â Â we should get a central place >> >> One of the issues I have with the Catalog is that it made a mess of >> the various MetaRrepo for Pharo... Showing in the end that the single >> place one should put a ConfigurationOf for Pharo is the squeak meta repo. > > not really. > if you put your project in the squeak meta repo it will not even be > listed (is old stuff and we are not listing those). > > the idea was to add a project in its corresponding development repo. But > is an uncomfortable way, yes (and it was a patch, not meant to last) And is it still in? Why then, on Pharo 7, is Catalog fetching SmaCC in the Pharo5 meta repo? >> That in addition the Catalog doesn't even use the best package >> management we have at a given point is just salt rubbed in the wound. > > thatâs a one method change. Instead: > > loadConfiguration > Gofer it > url: self repositoryUrl; > configurationOf: self name; > load > > loadConfiguration > Metacello new > repository: self repositoryUrl; > configuration: self name; > load. Good point. Why wasn't it done? I thought the choice of Gofer was on purpose, since other configurations loaded in the image in the official build are done in the same way (i.e. not Metacello). On a more general point, this is a question to me. How does the Pharo team, not using the project manager in its build process, intend to properly define a project manager? > when I made catalog, Metacello usage was not so expanded. > Yetâ¦ gofer will use metacello to load so, yes, it will use the best > package management we have at the moment. Hum, for me Metacello uses Gofer for loading. Not the reverse. (i.e. Metacello preps a spec, set up the repositories right including downloading, then ask Gofer to execute). Easy proof: when loaded via Metacello, Metacello registers the load (spec used, etc...); loaded via Gofer, nothing (i.e. you don't even know which spec was used in the configuration to load the packages). Please feel free to disprove. >>> Christophe has been working on project repository and we should check >>> what he has. >>> @Christophe? >>> - how do we make sure that we can validated (I can load this version >>> of XMLParser in that version of Pharo) >>> -- in this version of Pharo what is the latest working version of >>> this package >>> - if people do not maintain/add "configuration" into the catalog what >>> is the point? >>> -- How can we ease the participation to the catalog? Esteban I do not >>> care about the format. >>> Do you think that editing STON is easier than a class? I think that we >>> should have a button. >>> Look people do not care about posting their project into the repo. >>> May be we need a crawler? >> >> That would be an interesting concept, and maybe the right one, if the >> alternative is updating a cryptic JSON format each time you commit >> something in your project. > > very unlikely. > a spec made in STON you just have to modify it each time you do a > release (which is exactly what you have to do now with configurations). > > A crawler will not handle the need to publish a released version. > > one STON file as I imagine would be something like: > > project { > ânameâ : "blah", > âurlâ : "http://github.com/someone/blah", > âlastVersionâ : âv1.0.0", > âdescriptionâ : âSome project description" > } > and maybe a couple more. Howâs that cryptic? > maybe you are confusing things? No. Just write that ston now for the current state of OSProcess (with all versions and platforms supported). Or write that ston for a project that has stable branches for all pharo versions, from say 1.3 to now. But, in a way, please do the way you like, and, well, a few years down the line, we're back at the same situation as now. Not that I wish it, but I can see when someone is solving a problem with yet another way of having the problem. Thierry >>> @Peter no cargo is not dead now christophe cannot fix all the time the >>> PharoLauncher and make progress >>> on Cargo -> Pakbot >>> And yes I really want to have something that we can use soon. >>> - Needed immediate actions: >>> -- support baselineOf >>> -- how could we make sure that we can publish in multiple repo? (After >>> this is just a copy so I click on the package >>> and say copy to). >>> What else. >>> @thierry the story I do not use the catalog because the icons are not >>> understandable is not really good to me. >> >> As you wish. I know it belongs to one of these GUIs where I have to >> spend 10 minutes to try to remember what the icons mean. But that's >> just me. >> >> The key point to me is that the Catalog should reduce the friction it >> creates, not that the Catalog has to be a perfect solution. >> >> For example, do user-stories on it: how do one publish and updates a >> project on the Catalog? What has one to do in CI to ensure a project >> is validated ... Can the catalog just takes care of that part, if the >> project has a correct setup (project has tests visible in the >> configurationOf, catalog does the CI stuff of testing it upon each new >> release of Pharo, even stable because Iceberg breaks stuff when >> updated in Pharo 6.1, for example). Tags for Pharo versions are only >> granted if project has been tested on CI by the Catalog for the >> current version image you're in, for example. >> >> We know how to explore and manipulate project specs already; look into >> the GT tools for the code, and I also use a variant in my AltBrowser >> when I sort all packages under the configuration or baseline they are >> specified in. >> >> In short, make it so that the Catalog is low friction and bring value >> to both project maintainers and users. >> >> Thierry >> >>> Stef >>> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 8:46 AM, Esteban Lorenzano >>> <estebanlm(a)gmail.com <mailto:estebanlm@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>> why to kill it? >>>> right now we do not have a replacement. >>>> >>>> Esteban >>>> >>>>> On 19 Apr 2018, at 08:42, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com >>>>> <mailto:stepharo.self@gmail.com>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Hi guys >>>>> >>>>> What do we do with it? >>>>> What alternatives? >>>>> >>>>> Stef >>>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> >

April 20, 2018

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #785: 21733 Categorize methods in FontChoosers4

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #785 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #1219 was integrated: "21733 Categorize methods in FontChoosers4" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/1219 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/21733 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

April 20, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] Do we kill the catalog?

by Esteban Lorenzano

> On 20 Apr 2018, at 11:01, Thierry Goubier <thierry.goubier(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > Le 20/04/2018 Ã 09:09, Stephane Ducasse a Ã©crit : >> The underlying questions (sorry for people that need subtitles) are: >> - how do we have a central place to declare projects >> - right now in Smalltalkhub/list is a nice way to find projects >> with the move to github >> we should get a central place > > One of the issues I have with the Catalog is that it made a mess of the various MetaRrepo for Pharo... Showing in the end that the single place one should put a ConfigurationOf for Pharo is the squeak meta repo. not really. if you put your project in the squeak meta repo it will not even be listed (is old stuff and we are not listing those). the idea was to add a project in its corresponding development repo. But is an uncomfortable way, yes (and it was a patch, not meant to last) > That in addition the Catalog doesn't even use the best package management we have at a given point is just salt rubbed in the wound. thatâs a one method change. Instead: loadConfiguration Gofer it url: self repositoryUrl; configurationOf: self name; load loadConfiguration Metacello new repository: self repositoryUrl; configuration: self name; load. when I made catalog, Metacello usage was not so expanded. Yetâ¦ gofer will use metacello to load so, yes, it will use the best package management we have at the moment. > >> Christophe has been working on project repository and we should check >> what he has. >> @Christophe? >> - how do we make sure that we can validated (I can load this version >> of XMLParser in that version of Pharo) >> -- in this version of Pharo what is the latest working version of this package >> - if people do not maintain/add "configuration" into the catalog what >> is the point? >> -- How can we ease the participation to the catalog? Esteban I do not >> care about the format. >> Do you think that editing STON is easier than a class? I think that we >> should have a button. >> Look people do not care about posting their project into the repo. >> May be we need a crawler? > > That would be an interesting concept, and maybe the right one, if the alternative is updating a cryptic JSON format each time you commit something in your project. very unlikely. a spec made in STON you just have to modify it each time you do a release (which is exactly what you have to do now with configurations). A crawler will not handle the need to publish a released version. one STON file as I imagine would be something like: project { ânameâ : "blah", âurlâ : "http://github.com/someone/blah <http://github.com/someone/blah>", âlastVersionâ : âv1.0.0", âdescriptionâ : âSome project description" } and maybe a couple more. Howâs that cryptic? maybe you are confusing things? > >> @Peter no cargo is not dead now christophe cannot fix all the time the >> PharoLauncher and make progress >> on Cargo -> Pakbot >> And yes I really want to have something that we can use soon. >> - Needed immediate actions: >> -- support baselineOf >> -- how could we make sure that we can publish in multiple repo? (After >> this is just a copy so I click on the package >> and say copy to). >> What else. >> @thierry the story I do not use the catalog because the icons are not >> understandable is not really good to me. > > As you wish. I know it belongs to one of these GUIs where I have to spend 10 minutes to try to remember what the icons mean. But that's just me. > > The key point to me is that the Catalog should reduce the friction it creates, not that the Catalog has to be a perfect solution. > > For example, do user-stories on it: how do one publish and updates a project on the Catalog? What has one to do in CI to ensure a project is validated ... Can the catalog just takes care of that part, if the project has a correct setup (project has tests visible in the configurationOf, catalog does the CI stuff of testing it upon each new release of Pharo, even stable because Iceberg breaks stuff when updated in Pharo 6.1, for example). Tags for Pharo versions are only granted if project has been tested on CI by the Catalog for the current version image you're in, for example. > > We know how to explore and manipulate project specs already; look into the GT tools for the code, and I also use a variant in my AltBrowser when I sort all packages under the configuration or baseline they are specified in. > > In short, make it so that the Catalog is low friction and bring value to both project maintainers and users. > > Thierry > >> Stef >> On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 8:46 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> why to kill it? >>> right now we do not have a replacement. >>> >>> Esteban >>> >>>> On 19 Apr 2018, at 08:42, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Hi guys >>>> >>>> What do we do with it? >>>> What alternatives? >>>> >>>> Stef >>>> >>> >>> > >

April 20, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] Do we kill the catalog?

by Esteban Lorenzano

hi, > On 20 Apr 2018, at 09:09, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > The underlying questions (sorry for people that need subtitles) are: > > - how do we have a central place to declare projects > - right now in Smalltalkhub/list is a nice way to find projects > with the move to github > we should get a central place > > Christophe has been working on project repository and we should check > what he has. > @Christophe? > > - how do we make sure that we can validated (I can load this version > of XMLParser in that version of Pharo) > -- in this version of Pharo what is the latest working version of this package > > - if people do not maintain/add "configuration" into the catalog what > is the point? > -- How can we ease the participation to the catalog? Esteban I do not > care about the format. > Do you think that editing STON is easier than a class? I think that we > should have a button. STON is easier because : - you do not need to load a package to know a project spec. - you can edit it from outside, then participation is easier (in particular, people can add PRs and one can edit an STON file even in github site). yet, yesâ¦ regardless the choice we should have a âpublishâ plugin in iceberg. > Look people do not care about posting their project into the repo. but if they do not care to put their project in the cataog (whatever it is), is mostly sure they will not care to make it loadable (then validation is futile). btwâ¦ this query will give us all projects on github that with filetree format: https://github.com/search?q=filename%3A.filetree+.package&type=Code&ref=adv… <https://github.com/search?q=filename:.filetree+.package&type=Code&ref=advse…> (1531, but it will match each .filetree appearance so they are a lot lessâ¦ ) and this one in tonel: https://github.com/search?q=filename%3A.properties+tonel&type=Code&ref=advs… <https://github.com/search?q=filename:.properties+tonel&type=Code&ref=advsea…> (just 49 for now :(, but unique repositories :P) we can put those links in pharo README to make them easier to findâ¦ but of course this does not covers bitbucket or gitlab (they may have a public search API, but I donât know it)â¦ best approach is to have a catalog. > May be we need a crawler? we can, but we cannot know what is there in fact. btwâ¦ before we had sthub, but also ss, ss3 and others, so it was never clear about not published projects. > > @Peter no cargo is not dead now christophe cannot fix all the time the > PharoLauncher and make progress > on Cargo -> Pakbot > And yes I really want to have something that we can use soon. Cargo is orthogonal to the need of a centralised repository. Yes, its idea is to provide oneâ¦ but we will need a central repo, always. cheers, Esteban > > - Needed immediate actions: > -- support baselineOf > -- how could we make sure that we can publish in multiple repo? (After > this is just a copy so I click on the package > and say copy to). > > What else. > @thierry the story I do not use the catalog because the icons are not > understandable is not really good to me. > > > Stef > > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 8:46 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> why to kill it? >> right now we do not have a replacement. >> >> Esteban >> >>> On 19 Apr 2018, at 08:42, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi guys >>> >>> What do we do with it? >>> What alternatives? >>> >>> Stef >>> >> >> >

April 20, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] Do we kill the catalog?

by Thierry Goubier

Le 20/04/2018 Ã 09:09, Stephane Ducasse a Ã©critÂ : > The underlying questions (sorry for people that need subtitles) are: > > - how do we have a central place to declare projects > - right now in Smalltalkhub/list is a nice way to find projects > with the move to github > we should get a central place One of the issues I have with the Catalog is that it made a mess of the various MetaRrepo for Pharo... Showing in the end that the single place one should put a ConfigurationOf for Pharo is the squeak meta repo. That in addition the Catalog doesn't even use the best package management we have at a given point is just salt rubbed in the wound. > Christophe has been working on project repository and we should check > what he has. > @Christophe? > > - how do we make sure that we can validated (I can load this version > of XMLParser in that version of Pharo) > -- in this version of Pharo what is the latest working version of this package > > - if people do not maintain/add "configuration" into the catalog what > is the point? > -- How can we ease the participation to the catalog? Esteban I do not > care about the format. > Do you think that editing STON is easier than a class? I think that we > should have a button. > Look people do not care about posting their project into the repo. > May be we need a crawler? That would be an interesting concept, and maybe the right one, if the alternative is updating a cryptic JSON format each time you commit something in your project. > @Peter no cargo is not dead now christophe cannot fix all the time the > PharoLauncher and make progress > on Cargo -> Pakbot > And yes I really want to have something that we can use soon. > > - Needed immediate actions: > -- support baselineOf > -- how could we make sure that we can publish in multiple repo? (After > this is just a copy so I click on the package > and say copy to). > > What else. > @thierry the story I do not use the catalog because the icons are not > understandable is not really good to me. As you wish. I know it belongs to one of these GUIs where I have to spend 10 minutes to try to remember what the icons mean. But that's just me. The key point to me is that the Catalog should reduce the friction it creates, not that the Catalog has to be a perfect solution. For example, do user-stories on it: how do one publish and updates a project on the Catalog? What has one to do in CI to ensure a project is validated ... Can the catalog just takes care of that part, if the project has a correct setup (project has tests visible in the configurationOf, catalog does the CI stuff of testing it upon each new release of Pharo, even stable because Iceberg breaks stuff when updated in Pharo 6.1, for example). Tags for Pharo versions are only granted if project has been tested on CI by the Catalog for the current version image you're in, for example. We know how to explore and manipulate project specs already; look into the GT tools for the code, and I also use a variant in my AltBrowser when I sort all packages under the configuration or baseline they are specified in. In short, make it so that the Catalog is low friction and bring value to both project maintainers and users. Thierry > > Stef > > > On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 8:46 AM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> why to kill it? >> right now we do not have a replacement. >> >> Esteban >> >>> On 19 Apr 2018, at 08:42, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi guys >>> >>> What do we do with it? >>> What alternatives? >>> >>> Stef >>> >> >> > >

April 20, 2018