- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-project] [Hudson] Jenkins

by Tudor Girba

I have done that recently with ci.moosetechnology.org. I just deployed jenkins.war where hudson.war was, changed the script to point to it, and everything was fine. Cheers, Doru On 21 May 2011, at 18:33, Damien Cassou wrote: > On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:39 AM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> wrote: >> We will test it a bit and then think about how to move all configs there. > > https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Upgrading+from+Hudson+to+Jenkins > > -- > Damien Cassou > http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st > > "Lambdas are relegated to relative obscurity until Java makes them > popular by not having them." James Iry > -- www.tudorgirba.com "Problem solving should be focused on describing the problem in a way that makes the solution obvious."

May 21, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] [Hudson] Jenkins

by Geert Claes

Hi Marcus, Maybe you could replace the resource images with the attached images - replaced "Jenkins" with "Pharo" :) Re-branding: http://forum.world.st/file/n3540934/title.png title.png http://forum.world.st/file/n3540934/jenkins.png jenkins.png http://forum.world.st/file/n3540934/topbar.png topbar.png -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Hudson-Jenkins-tp3538245p3540934.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

May 21, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] [Hudson] Jenkins

by Damien Cassou

On Fri, May 20, 2011 at 1:39 AM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker(a)inria.fr> wrote: > We will test it a bit and then think about how to move all configs there. https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Upgrading+from+Hudson+to+Jenkins -- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st "Lambdas are relegated to relative obscurity until Java makes them popular by not having them." James Iry

May 21, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] [squeak-dev] My solution to handling errors in system-critical processes

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

I really like the pros that you mentioned early. Excellent work. Stef On May 21, 2011, at 2:50 AM, Igor Stasenko wrote: > Here the revised version, which more optimal. > Initially i was capturing thisContext into temporary variable, > which when running on Stack-based VMs leads to reifying context on heap. > This can be avoided, since we can simply find this context from closure's home. > > So if your code runs without errors you will pay usual price of #on:do: handler. > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko AKA sig. > <on-fork.1.cs>

May 21, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] bug in Nautilus/RPackage?

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

alex give us a process to reproduce the bug. Stef On May 20, 2011, at 10:26 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote: >> I don't know how to reproduce the situation in the screenshot, but I have a small idea of what the problem is: >> Your package Spy is composed of several subcategories. All the classes are defined in the subcategories but none is defined in the one called 'Spy'. > > All Spy classes are defined in a category Spy-XXX > >> In Rpackage, the classes are put inside the RPackage matching the category in which the class is defined > > What does it mean? How comes that the package Spy was created? Where does it come from? > > I just took a fresh 1.3 one click, downloaded Nautilus then Spy. Spy appear as one single package called 'Spy'. No idea where it comes from. > > Alexandre > >> >> 2011/5/19 Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com> >> Thanks for making it happen :-) >> >> Alexandre >> >> >> On 19 May 2011, at 15:39, StÃ©phane Ducasse wrote: >> >>> thanks for reporting it. >>> >>> do you have a reproducable way of arriving to this state? >>> >>>> Hi ! >>>> >>>> I think I bumped into a bug when using Nautilus. I am not sure whether this is due to RPackage or not. >>>> >>>> I loaded Spy, and apparently there is no class in the package within Nautilus. >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Alexandre >>>> -- >>>> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: >>>> Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu >>>> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> <Screen shot 2011-05-19 at 11.21.23.png> >>> >>> >> >> -- >> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: >> Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu >> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > > -- > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > >

May 21, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] The Cult of Done Manifesto

by Norbert Hartl

Am 21.05.2011 um 02:40 schrieb Andres Valloud: > Statements like "just pretend you know what you're doing" should raise red flags because it leads to "doing anything at all, even it is bad, is good". One might as well forget trying to know in favor of pretending to know, because doing something (anything) makes you right. But of course, no amount of pretense will make software work when it's critical for it to work at a customer's site, or when doing a demo of your research work while defending your thesis. Not only that, but doing something any which way has the hidden cost of incurring into software debt. Exactly how much cleanup homework are we still dealing with because of that kind of attitude? Are we happy with the results? Things that Work(TM) don't happen by accident, they are the product of significant amounts of effort. Shoddy code that appears to work some of the time is Just Bad(TM), and sooner or later you pay for it ***with interest***. > I don't read an imperative in that rule that you should pretend. I read it in a way that "not knowing it exactly" shouldn't keep you from doing things. There is no apriori experience. So we often don't know exactly what we do but we learn it while doing it. You might think you know what you are doing and you will learn a lot while you are doing it. At the end you will look back to the point when you started and what you think might by that you were some kind of pretending at the beginning. We are as incremental in learning as our software is in being created. IMHO the term "doing it right" is omnipresent in software development and often leads in the wrong direction. I think I suffered more from that so far as from pretending colleagues. my 2 cents, Norbert > On 5/18/11 4:17 , Marcus Denker wrote: >> The Cult of Done Manifesto >> >> - There are three states of being. Not knowing, action and completion. >> >> - Accept that everything is a draft. It helps to get it done. >> >> - There is no editing stage. >> >> - Pretending you know what you're doing is almost the same as knowing what you are doing, >> so just accept that you know what you're doing even if you don't and do it. >> >> - Banish procrastination. If you wait more than a week to get an idea done, abandon it. >> >> - The point of being done is not to finish but to get other things done. >> >> - Once you're done you can throw it away. >> >> - Laugh at perfection. It's boring and keeps you from being done. >> >> - People without dirty hands are wrong. Doing something makes you right. >> >> - Failure counts as done. So do mistakes. >> >> - Destruction is a variant of done. >> >> - If you have an idea and publish it on the internet, that counts as a ghost of done. >> >> - Done is the engine of more. >> >> http://www.brepettis.com/blog/2009/3/3/the-cult-of-done-manifesto.html?v=1 >> >> -- >> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de >> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. >> >> >> . >> >

May 21, 2011

[Pharo-project] SerialPort Plugin Patches.

by Friedrich Dominicus

I've downloaded the Cog sources and checked the SerialPlugin stuff. I'd like to use it with the patches that will make it work on Linux also but for that there should be a primite with printPortByName or the like, but it's not in the actual sources. So can anyone tell me where an actualiced SerialPlugin is, with which I then can use strings for accessing the serial lines? Thanks Friedrich -- Q-Software Solutions GmbH; Sitz: Bruchsal; Registergericht: Mannheim Registriernummer: HRB232138; Geschaeftsfuehrer: Friedrich Dominicus

May 21, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] The Cult of Done Manifesto

by Hilaire Fernandes

And I will add, if you want something undone: do it, at least try hard to do it. Hilaire Le 18/05/2011 20:04, StÃ©phane Ducasse a Ã©crit : > excellent. > So I guess that we can interpret it as a call to the community to get even more in doing mode :) > I love that message. > Get expert by doing :) > Stef > > On May 18, 2011, at 1:17 PM, Marcus Denker wrote: > >> The Cult of Done Manifesto >> >> - There are three states of being. Not knowing, action and completion. >> >> - Accept that everything is a draft. It helps to get it done. >> >> - There is no editing stage. >> >> - Pretending you know what you're doing is almost the same as knowing what you are doing, >> so just accept that you know what you're doing even if you don't and do it. >> >> - Banish procrastination. If you wait more than a week to get an idea done, abandon it. >> >> - The point of being done is not to finish but to get other things done. >> >> - Once you're done you can throw it away. >> >> - Laugh at perfection. It's boring and keeps you from being done. >> >> - People without dirty hands are wrong. Doing something makes you right. >> >> - Failure counts as done. So do mistakes. >> >> - Destruction is a variant of done. >> >> - If you have an idea and publish it on the internet, that counts as a ghost of done. >> >> - Done is the engine of more. >> >> http://www.brepettis.com/blog/2009/3/3/the-cult-of-done-manifesto.html?v=1 >> >> -- >> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de >> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. >> >> > > > -- Education 0.2 -- http://blog.ofset.org/hilaire

May 21, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] The Cult of Done Manifesto

by Andres Valloud

> Agreed. There is a big difference between "do something" and "do it right". > > But at same time, sometimes, you have to do something first and only > then you will know how to do it right. > Software development is iterative process. I support the idea of putting effort into doing things, as opposed to merely discussing doing things for the sake of discussion. I also think it's important to have a good definition of what "done" means :). I wish the manifesto would emphasize that sometimes it's hard to get "done" no matter what you do, and that there are cases in which pretense doesn't cut it. Essentially I think we're on the same page, though. Andres.

May 21, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] The Cult of Done Manifesto

by Igor Stasenko

On 21 May 2011 02:40, Andres Valloud <avalloud(a)smalltalk.comcastbiz.net> wrote: > Statements like "just pretend you know what you're doing" should raise red > flags because it leads to "doing anything at all, even it is bad, is good". > Â One might as well forget trying to know in favor of pretending to know, > because doing something (anything) makes you right. Â But of course, no > amount of pretense will make software work when it's critical for it to work > at a customer's site, or when doing a demo of your research work while > defending your thesis. Â Not only that, but doing something any which way has > the hidden cost of incurring into software debt. Â Exactly how much cleanup > homework are we still dealing with because of that kind of attitude? Â Are we > happy with the results? Things that Work(TM) don't happen by accident, they > are the product of significant amounts of effort. Â Shoddy code that appears > to work some of the time is Just Bad(TM), and sooner or later you pay for it > ***with interest***. > Agreed. There is a big difference between "do something" and "do it right". But at same time, sometimes, you have to do something first and only then you will know how to do it right. Software development is iterative process. -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

May 21, 2011