- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-dev] Experiment: New Download page based on Pharo Launcher

by Sven Van Caekenberghe

> On 16 Mar 2018, at 17:59, Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com> wrote: > > Ben Coman wrote >> it seems some people want to push PharoLauncher to *be* Pharo. >> To me this seems a poor strategyâ¦ This seems strange to me and highly >> likely to confuse newcomers. > > Yes, this was already discussed at length on the ML. > > The term Pharo already has a meaning: a vm + image containing both an OOP > language (is it Smalltalk or Smalltalk inspired? Please don't actually > answer that lol) and IDE written therein - or you could call it prototype > Dynabook software. > > If we now try to redefine the above (or really overload, because the former > definition will still coexist) to mean an app that manages images, it may > just be the final straw to make sure that no one ever will be able to give > any acceptable answer in less than 2038 hours to the question: What is > Pharo? ;) > > But just in case we step into the quicksand even further, in this dystopian > future you can just copy paste this definition: > Pharo is a Pharo app that manages Pharo images, which can be used to make > Pharo apps, which can be used to manage Pharo images, [which can be used to > make Pharo apps, which can be used to manage Pharo images]* Haha, yes it is so fluid it cannot be described only be experienced through prolonged exposure, it is truly magical. Actually, that is not so far from the truth. > ----- > Cheers, > Sean > -- > Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html >

March 16, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] Experiment: New Download page based on Pharo Launcher

by Sean P. DeNigris

Ben Coman wrote > it seems some people want to push PharoLauncher to *be* Pharo. > To me this seems a poor strategyâ¦ This seems strange to me and highly > likely to confuse newcomers. Yes, this was already discussed at length on the ML. The term Pharo already has a meaning: a vm + image containing both an OOP language (is it Smalltalk or Smalltalk inspired? Please don't actually answer that lol) and IDE written therein - or you could call it prototype Dynabook software. If we now try to redefine the above (or really overload, because the former definition will still coexist) to mean an app that manages images, it may just be the final straw to make sure that no one ever will be able to give any acceptable answer in less than 2038 hours to the question: What is Pharo? ;) But just in case we step into the quicksand even further, in this dystopian future you can just copy paste this definition: Pharo is a Pharo app that manages Pharo images, which can be used to make Pharo apps, which can be used to manage Pharo images, [which can be used to make Pharo apps, which can be used to manage Pharo images]* ----- Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html

March 16, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] Executive Summary of the recent FileStream Changes

by Sean P. DeNigris

Stephane Ducasse-3 wrote > we are planning to migrate a selection of the old > deprecated methods (of Pharo 30, 40, 50, 60) into a MigrationPackage > with deprecatedWithTransform rule > to help the migration of the old code to new one. Cool!!! ----- Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html

March 16, 2018

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #699: 21601 Use "instance creation" in FT classes

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #699 was: SUCCESS. The Pull Request #1115 was integrated: "21601 Use "instance creation" in FT classes" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/1115 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/21601 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

March 16, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] Windows PharoLauncher cannot create "C:\Program Files (x86)\Pharo\Pharo.image"

by Ben Coman

On 16 March 2018 at 20:53, Christophe Demarey <christophe.demarey(a)inria.fr> wrote: > Hi Ben, > > Le 16 mars 2018 Ã 13:22, Ben Coman <btc(a)openinworld.com> a Ã©crit : > > I popped over to Windows for a moment to try to make my CloudflareUn > crossplatform, > and installed PharoLauncher from the downloads page... > http://files.pharo.org/pharo-launcher/1.1/pharo-launcher- > installer-1.1-x86.exe > > I logged in as an Admin to do this, but when I open it I get an error... > "PrimitiveFailed: primitive #createDirectory: in WindowsStore failed Â» > > > Did you try to right-click on the installer and select Â« Run as > administrator Â« ? Iâm not sure that apps are all run with admin privileges > even if you are logged in with an admin account. > I tried "Run as administrator" from Non-Admin account with the same result. An Admin privileged that is no the "Administrator" account (which Microsoft have hard to access) only needs UAC to ask the question to approve things to happen. > > Also, I would expect trouble for Non-Admin users trying to use the Admin > installed Pharo Launcher.trying to write to "pharo-local" under "Program > Files Â». > > > Yes, that for sure! > For now, if you are admin, you could install PharoLauncher under Â« Program > Files Â» but then, you also need to be admin to run it. If you are not > admin, you should install PharoLauncher elsewhere. > Strange. I tried and the Installer hung when I tried to Browse for a new directory. I'll try again later after a reboot. > > I did not yet had time to test what Vincent on app packaging but probably, > it will solve the issue as Pharo Launcher does not need to write anything > to the installation directory (was needed by tools like GT, epicea, stdout). > > Does PharoLauncher have its own CI testing to ensure it can open okay > and run an image? I'm glad to see it promoted in importance but with this > it probably needs such CI testing of its own separate to the usual Pharo CI > testing. On Windows such CI testing *should* run as a Non-Admin user. > > > Functional testing like this is done by hand for this part. There are unit > tests. you can check that on CI: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo- > ci-jenkins2/job/PharoLauncher/ > There is room for improvement here. If you have an idea on how to automate > functional testing like this, it would be a great addition! > I've not much time with my current 12 hour work roster and side commitments, but I'll keep it in mind to look if I get the chance. > tw, requiring Administrative pbrivileges to install PharoLauncher is going > to lock out people who don't have administrative control over their PCs > e.g. University student labs. > > > It was like that before. I removed this check from the installer so that > standard users can install PharoLauncher in a folder where they have write > access. This way, PharoLauncher works. > > Wanting to run a quick demo for someone in a corporate office. Why don't > we make it the same as OSX and Linux and be usable without Admin > privileges. That would lower a barrier to entry. > > > It is already possible. Just, do not install PharoLauncher in a folder > requiring admin rights. > One improvement would be if there lack of Admin rights is detected, suggest an alternate default install location, but I guess thats highly dependent on what is available from the installer-system. cheers -ben > Thanks for feedbacks, > Christophe >

March 16, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] Windows PharoLauncher cannot create "C:\Program Files (x86)\Pharo\Pharo.image"

by Ben Coman

On 16 March 2018 at 22:23, Peter UhnÃ¡k <i.uhnak(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > For now, if you are admin, you could install PharoLauncher under Â« > Program Files Â» but then, you also need to be admin to run it. If you are > not admin, you should install PharoLauncher elsewhere. > > As I see this recommendation for the Nth time, maybe it is time the > default location to C:\Pharo (or C:\PharoLauncher) ... > > other languages don't seem to have any problem with that whatsoever (I see > in my dir C:\Python27, C:\Ruby24-x64, cygwin, msys, mingw, ...) > > If the installer cannot escalate on its own, it shouldn't try in the first > place. Otherwise it's just bad experience in literally the first step > people will take with Pharo. > > Interestingly Python 3 has installed itself in %APPDATA%\Local\Programs\Python\Python36-32 > ... so maybe that's also a location to consider which doesn't require admin > rights. > > Peter > I think Python 3 has it right. Its also where GitForWindows installs itself. Alternatively the parent %APPDATA%\Local\ (equivalently %LOCALAPPDATA% which can be typed into Windows Explorer) is where many apps seem to put their main executable. On my system I discover... %LOCALAPPDATA% \ Discord \ app-0.0.298 \ Discord.exe %LOCALAPPDATA% \ Atom \ atom.exe %LOCALAPPDATA% \ GitHubDesktop \ GitHubDesktop.exe %LOCALAPPDATA% \ slack \ slack.exe %LOCALAPPDATA% \ Roblox \ Versions \ RobloxStudioLauncherBeta.exe cheers -ben > > > On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 1:53 PM, Christophe Demarey < > christophe.demarey(a)inria.fr> wrote: > >> Hi Ben, >> >> Le 16 mars 2018 Ã 13:22, Ben Coman <btc(a)openinworld.com> a Ã©crit : >> >> I popped over to Windows for a moment to try to make my CloudflareUn >> crossplatform, >> and installed PharoLauncher from the downloads page... >> http://files.pharo.org/pharo-launcher/1.1/pharo-launcher-ins >> taller-1.1-x86.exe >> >> I logged in as an Admin to do this, but when I open it I get an error... >> "PrimitiveFailed: primitive #createDirectory: in WindowsStore failed Â» >> >> >> Did you try to right-click on the installer and select Â« Run as >> administrator Â« ? Iâm not sure that apps are all run with admin privileges >> even if you are logged in with an admin account. >> >> Also, I would expect trouble for Non-Admin users trying to use the Admin >> installed Pharo Launcher.trying to write to "pharo-local" under "Program >> Files Â». >> >> >> Yes, that for sure! >> For now, if you are admin, you could install PharoLauncher under Â« >> Program Files Â» but then, you also need to be admin to run it. If you are >> not admin, you should install PharoLauncher elsewhere. >> >> I did not yet had time to test what Vincent on app packaging but >> probably, it will solve the issue as Pharo Launcher does not need to write >> anything to the installation directory (was needed by tools like GT, >> epicea, stdout). >> >> Does PharoLauncher have its own CI testing to ensure it can open okay >> and run an image? I'm glad to see it promoted in importance but with this >> it probably needs such CI testing of its own separate to the usual Pharo CI >> testing. On Windows such CI testing *should* run as a Non-Admin user. >> >> >> Functional testing like this is done by hand for this part. There are >> unit tests. you can check that on CI: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo- >> ci-jenkins2/job/PharoLauncher/ >> There is room for improvement here. If you have an idea on how to >> automate functional testing like this, it would be a great addition! >> >> btw, requiring Administrative privileges to install PharoLauncher is >> going to lock out people who don't have administrative control over their >> PCs e.g. University student labs. >> >> >> It was like that before. I removed this check from the installer so that >> standard users can install PharoLauncher in a folder where they have write >> access. This way, PharoLauncher works. >> >> Wanting to run a quick demo for someone in a corporate office. Why don't >> we make it the same as OSX and Linux and be usable without Admin >> privileges. That would lower a barrier to entry. >> >> >> It is already possible. Just, do not install PharoLauncher in a folder >> requiring admin rights. >> >> Thanks for feedbacks, >> Christophe >> > >

March 16, 2018

[Pharo 7.0-dev] Build #698: 21595 Use "instance creation" protocol in OSVMWindowHandle

by ci-pharo-ci-jenkins2＠inria.fr

There is a new Pharo build available! The status of the build #698 was: FAILURE. The Pull Request #1110 was integrated: "21595 Use "instance creation" protocol in OSVMWindowHandle" Pull request url: https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/pull/1110 Issue Url: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/21595 Build Url: https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-ci-jenkins2/job/Test%20pending%20pull%20request%2…

March 16, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] Idea to manager package comment in better way

by Stephane Ducasse

Hi denis Both solutions are ok for me. STef On Fri, Mar 16, 2018 at 2:38 PM, Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk(a)gmail.com> wrote: > And at the end I found that #packageComment: is not really work because it > expects already formatted string suitable for source code insertion. > So you can't just call: > > aPackage packageComment: 'my comment'. > > Instead all users (only Nautilus exists) should write > > aPackage packageComment: 'my comment' printString > > I will create pull request with all this changes > > 2018-03-14 16:51 GMT+01:00 Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk(a)gmail.com>: >> >> And I found that manifest classes are already commented as package >> comment. >> >> 2018-03-14 16:40 GMT+01:00 Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk(a)gmail.com>: >>> >>> Hi. >>> >>> I look at hierarchy of PackageManifest and I was wondering that all these >>> classes are commented but most of packages which they describe are not. >>> >>> Also interesting that most of manifest comments are same. >>> >>> Then I found that package comment is managed as special class side method >>> #description which is generated when you call "aPackage packageComment: >>> 'test'". >>> >>> Now the idea: will not it be better to manage package comment as manifest >>> class comment? >>> >>> Manifest is already responsible to describe the package. So it looks >>> logical to have "manifest comment = package comment". >>> Also it will simplify code and remove duplication of texts. >>> In addition it will add extra place indicating that package needs to be >>> commented because uncommented classes are marked in the browser. >>> >>> What you think? >>> >> >

March 16, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] Experiment: New Download page based on Pharo Launcher

by Ben Coman

On 15 March 2018 at 16:01, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> wrote: > > > On 15 Mar 2018, at 00:08, Cyril Ferlicot <cyril.ferlicot(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > On mer. 14 mars 2018 at 18:18, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> > wrote: > >> >> >> > On 9 Mar 2018, at 23:34, Torsten Bergmann <astares(a)gmx.de> wrote: >> > >> > Additional portable versions would be nice too (based on a simple ZIP) >> instead of only the installable apps >> > >> >> Is there a deeper reason for this? If I look at âother systemsâ, they >> manage to have *one* download, *one* way of installing. >> For me, offering *a lot* of possible different ways means that the user >> has to choose without knowing why there is even the option to chooseâ¦ >> > > The problem is that Pharo is different from other systems. When you > install eclipse, you'll use the installed eclipse for all your projects for > a long time. > > Pharo images are more like a "disposable". You'll not use the same Pharo > image for multiple big projects and you'll more easily throw away an image > to take a new one from time to time. > > Actually I think I download and delete around 5 images/day sometime. > > This complicate a little things because sometime you want to directly > download one image. Sometime you want to have one application to manage > your images (Pharo launcher) > > For me, the Launcher should be the âVM Downloadâ, that comes with a) a > default template image of the release and b) the launcher too to discover > images. > > *But* it should be done in a way that you can of course just download more > images (and I would love to have images actually being âone fileâ) and, > having Pharo installed, you can run them, using the âPharoâ that you have > installed (the launcher). > > The âLauncherâ should feel more like âI have installed Pharo, now I can > run imagesâ. > > As such, I think we should add back links that point to single image > downloads on the download page. > > Marcus > I'm really glad PharoLauncher has been promoted to the download page, but it seems some people want to push PharoLauncher to *be* Pharo. To me this seems a poor strategy. The README file in the PharoLauncher zip downloads says... "Pharo 1.1-2018.01.16 This distribution was built January 16, 2018." This seems strange to me and highly likely to confuse newcomers. Pharo 1.1 more than a few years old. How can something built in 2018 be named "Pharo 1.1" ? And if PharoLauncher is instead published as Pharo 7, then it seems strange to use it to run Pharo 5 images and later Pharo 8 images. Why not have the Downloads page just say "The recommended way to manage Pharo downloads is with PharoLauncher" and allow PharoLauncher to exist as a separate entity. This would be similar similar to those applications where you download an initial 500kB installer, which then grabs the other 100MB from the net to complete the install. Also, when maybe one day we can use Pharo as a command line shell, how will that relate to PharoLauncher being presented "as" Pharo. cheers -ben P.S. Perhaps the idea of App Store has some similarities to PharoLauncher, since in an App Store you search for programs to download and run. A further evolution of PharoLauncher might become PharoStore Now Apple's app store is not called "OSX" and Microsoft's app store is not called "Windows". They are separate entities .

March 16, 2018

Re: [Pharo-dev] Experiment: New Download page based on Pharo Launcher

by Esteban Lorenzano

but thing is: default download should be the launcher. because this is the ânewbie-friendlyâ approach. All the rest can be in under a link (or a subtitle, doesnât matters). Esteban > On 16 Mar 2018, at 08:50, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I do not see why this is a problem to have the launcher and Pharo. > The launcher is an App and Pharo another. > Yesterday the launcher crashed on Windows when I tried to pair program > with someone so we downloaded > the default Pharo version. > Why do we want to make things complex. > > You want Pharo > - donwload it > > You want to manage your pharo devs and access jenkins and other services > - use the launcher. > > Stef > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 3:38 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> wrote: >> -> better structure >> -> simplified the large print (no need to talk about downloading zip files) >> >> TODO: >> - add back a section about downloading images. >> >>> On 14 Mar 2018, at 18:18, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> wrote: >>> >>> Ok, I will fix that in the next pass. >>> >>>> On 9 Mar 2018, at 18:10, Sean P. DeNigris <sean(a)clipperadams.com> wrote: >>>> >>>> Marcus Denker-4 wrote >>>>> comments welcomeâ¦ >>>> >>>> IHMO the structure is a little confusing because the first heading "Usage" >>>> (Launcher implied) is on the same level as other methods like "Linux >>>> Packages". I think there needs to be something like a header one level >>>> higher like "Other Options" between these two sections. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- >>>> Cheers, >>>> Sean >>>> -- >>>> Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html >>>> >>> >> >> >

March 16, 2018