Re: [Pharo-project] New pharo-dev based on 10196
Damien, Thanks for making the new image. Is there a way to tell the image to display walkbacks instead of going straight into the debugger? The new image seemed a nice excuse to play catch-up, which means getting a few things loaded. Seaside - I recalled discussion of it, and quckly stumbled onto a closed bug report about ScriptLoader new universalInstaller universe install: 'Seaside'. That appears to work. The cryptography team's work will be important. This gets weird fast. I have a 3.9 image where it is installed correctly and works; I have very little idea how that happened. My subsequent installation attempts appear not to be complete. SqueakMap appears to be going away in Pharo. Replacing it appear to be Installer, ScriptLoader, and maybe some of your tools to build the developer images. Is there a clear correct way to install packages now? Put another way, if I make an attempt to sort out installing the cryptography and SSL classes in Pharo, how would recommend attacking it? Pharo is not even in beta yet, so no complaints, but I am missing something on how to go from a new core image to something that is ready for use. Bill Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D. University of Florida Department of Anesthesiology PO Box 100254 Gainesville, FL 32610-0254 Email: bschwab@anest.ufl.edu Tel: (352) 273-6785 FAX: (352) 392-7029
Bill Schwab wrote:
Damien,
Thanks for making the new image. Is there a way to tell the image to display walkbacks instead of going straight into the debugger?
The new image seemed a nice excuse to play catch-up, which means getting a few things loaded.
Seaside - I recalled discussion of it, and quckly stumbled onto a closed bug report about
ScriptLoader new universalInstaller universe install: 'Seaside'.
That appears to work. The cryptography team's work will be important. This gets weird fast. I have a 3.9 image where it is installed correctly and works; I have very little idea how that happened. My subsequent installation attempts appear not to be complete.
SqueakMap appears to be going away in Pharo. Replacing it appear to be Installer, ScriptLoader, and maybe some of your tools to build the developer images. Is there a clear correct way to install packages now? Put another way, if I make an attempt to sort out installing the cryptography and SSL classes in Pharo, how would recommend attacking it?
Pharo is not even in beta yet, so no complaints, but I am missing something on how to go from a new core image to something that is ready for use.
Bill
Hi Bill, I maintain that your best bet for keeping all the balls in the air for whatever target images that you have in mind will be Sake/Packages. load: Installer install: 'Packages'. And have a look around. The Pharo class is already there if you need a specialised install proceedure for pharo. Keith
Bill report any problem to load packages and we willcheck what we can do? Do you have something that we can repeat. And indeed we prefer MC as package format. Stef On Dec 20, 2008, at 1:04 AM, Bill Schwab wrote:
Damien,
Thanks for making the new image. Is there a way to tell the image to display walkbacks instead of going straight into the debugger?
The new image seemed a nice excuse to play catch-up, which means getting a few things loaded.
Seaside - I recalled discussion of it, and quckly stumbled onto a closed bug report about
ScriptLoader new universalInstaller universe install: 'Seaside'.
That appears to work. The cryptography team's work will be important. This gets weird fast. I have a 3.9 image where it is installed correctly and works; I have very little idea how that happened. My subsequent installation attempts appear not to be complete.
SqueakMap appears to be going away in Pharo. Replacing it appear to be Installer, ScriptLoader, and maybe some of your tools to build the developer images. Is there a clear correct way to install packages now? Put another way, if I make an attempt to sort out installing the cryptography and SSL classes in Pharo, how would recommend attacking it?
Pharo is not even in beta yet, so no complaints, but I am missing something on how to go from a new core image to something that is ready for use.
Bill
Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D. University of Florida Department of Anesthesiology PO Box 100254 Gainesville, FL 32610-0254
Email: bschwab@anest.ufl.edu Tel: (352) 273-6785 FAX: (352) 392-7029
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
In a recent discussion with Marcus and Lukas we came to the conclusion that a package universe for Pharo 1.0 would be the best solution. Somebody would be responsible to manage this universe and only add packages that are tested and known to work. I think this is really important that we have higher standards regarding external packages. In my experience with SqueakMap, the chance that a package actually works is less than the chance it is not working. This is a show stopper for newcomers. Our plan was to remove SqueakMap from Pharo-core, but I assume it could be put into the universe so it can be loaded again. Cheers, Adrian On Dec 20, 2008, at 01:04 , Bill Schwab wrote:
Damien,
Thanks for making the new image. Is there a way to tell the image to display walkbacks instead of going straight into the debugger?
The new image seemed a nice excuse to play catch-up, which means getting a few things loaded.
Seaside - I recalled discussion of it, and quckly stumbled onto a closed bug report about
ScriptLoader new universalInstaller universe install: 'Seaside'.
That appears to work. The cryptography team's work will be important. This gets weird fast. I have a 3.9 image where it is installed correctly and works; I have very little idea how that happened. My subsequent installation attempts appear not to be complete.
SqueakMap appears to be going away in Pharo. Replacing it appear to be Installer, ScriptLoader, and maybe some of your tools to build the developer images. Is there a clear correct way to install packages now? Put another way, if I make an attempt to sort out installing the cryptography and SSL classes in Pharo, how would recommend attacking it?
Pharo is not even in beta yet, so no complaints, but I am missing something on how to go from a new core image to something that is ready for use.
Bill
Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D. University of Florida Department of Anesthesiology PO Box 100254 Gainesville, FL 32610-0254
Email: bschwab@anest.ufl.edu Tel: (352) 273-6785 FAX: (352) 392-7029
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
Sounds a good plan to my ears :) Stef On Dec 20, 2008, at 11:16 AM, Adrian Lienhard wrote:
In a recent discussion with Marcus and Lukas we came to the conclusion that a package universe for Pharo 1.0 would be the best solution. Somebody would be responsible to manage this universe and only add packages that are tested and known to work. I think this is really important that we have higher standards regarding external packages. In my experience with SqueakMap, the chance that a package actually works is less than the chance it is not working. This is a show stopper for newcomers. Our plan was to remove SqueakMap from Pharo-core, but I assume it could be put into the universe so it can be loaded again.
Cheers, Adrian
On Dec 20, 2008, at 01:04 , Bill Schwab wrote:
Damien,
Thanks for making the new image. Is there a way to tell the image to display walkbacks instead of going straight into the debugger?
The new image seemed a nice excuse to play catch-up, which means getting a few things loaded.
Seaside - I recalled discussion of it, and quckly stumbled onto a closed bug report about
ScriptLoader new universalInstaller universe install: 'Seaside'.
That appears to work. The cryptography team's work will be important. This gets weird fast. I have a 3.9 image where it is installed correctly and works; I have very little idea how that happened. My subsequent installation attempts appear not to be complete.
SqueakMap appears to be going away in Pharo. Replacing it appear to be Installer, ScriptLoader, and maybe some of your tools to build the developer images. Is there a clear correct way to install packages now? Put another way, if I make an attempt to sort out installing the cryptography and SSL classes in Pharo, how would recommend attacking it?
Pharo is not even in beta yet, so no complaints, but I am missing something on how to go from a new core image to something that is ready for use.
Bill
Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D. University of Florida Department of Anesthesiology PO Box 100254 Gainesville, FL 32610-0254
Email: bschwab@anest.ufl.edu Tel: (352) 273-6785 FAX: (352) 392-7029
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
Make sense to me Alexandre On 20 Dec 2008, at 07:16, Adrian Lienhard wrote:
In a recent discussion with Marcus and Lukas we came to the conclusion that a package universe for Pharo 1.0 would be the best solution. Somebody would be responsible to manage this universe and only add packages that are tested and known to work. I think this is really important that we have higher standards regarding external packages. In my experience with SqueakMap, the chance that a package actually works is less than the chance it is not working. This is a show stopper for newcomers. Our plan was to remove SqueakMap from Pharo-core, but I assume it could be put into the universe so it can be loaded again.
Cheers, Adrian
On Dec 20, 2008, at 01:04 , Bill Schwab wrote:
Damien,
Thanks for making the new image. Is there a way to tell the image to display walkbacks instead of going straight into the debugger?
The new image seemed a nice excuse to play catch-up, which means getting a few things loaded.
Seaside - I recalled discussion of it, and quckly stumbled onto a closed bug report about
ScriptLoader new universalInstaller universe install: 'Seaside'.
That appears to work. The cryptography team's work will be important. This gets weird fast. I have a 3.9 image where it is installed correctly and works; I have very little idea how that happened. My subsequent installation attempts appear not to be complete.
SqueakMap appears to be going away in Pharo. Replacing it appear to be Installer, ScriptLoader, and maybe some of your tools to build the developer images. Is there a clear correct way to install packages now? Put another way, if I make an attempt to sort out installing the cryptography and SSL classes in Pharo, how would recommend attacking it?
Pharo is not even in beta yet, so no complaints, but I am missing something on how to go from a new core image to something that is ready for use.
Bill
Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D. University of Florida Department of Anesthesiology PO Box 100254 Gainesville, FL 32610-0254
Email: bschwab@anest.ufl.edu Tel: (352) 273-6785 FAX: (352) 392-7029
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
-- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 11:16 AM, Adrian Lienhard <adi@netstyle.ch> wrote:
In a recent discussion with Marcus and Lukas we came to the conclusion that a package universe for Pharo 1.0 would be the best solution.
As the main maintainer of the dev Universe for Squeak 3.9-3.10 and Pharo, I have to disagree. Having a separate Universe for Pharo will be a pain. For each new version of a package, I will have to publish it to both the dev Universe and the Pharo universe. I advise you to use Packages instead for which subclassing is possible between distributions. That way, I could update one class and the other is automatically updated. Packages loads very easily inside Pharo and does not require overrides. Installer install: 'Packages' Have a look at the script here: http://installer.pbwiki.com/Packages-Pharo0:1 -- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st
Hi Damien, Let me try to understand your suggestion. You would use Sacke-Packages instead of a Universe. As far as I see, a Sacke-Package models the same information as one in a Universe (that is, name, description, dependencies, source location, etc.), right? Hence, the main difference is that this information can be managed with MC instead of a XML. Furthermore, as you suggest, we could share package definitions between different Pharo versions and even between Pharo and Squeak. Questions: - Is there a GUI frontend for Sack-Packages like for Universes? I think some way is needed to allow people more easily browser the provided packages. If it didn't exist, which I expect, I assume it would not be hard to build one. - How do users that already have installed Sacke-Packages (I guess we would pre-install it in the Pharo distro), get the most recent version of the package definitions? Obviously, they should always automatically get the most recent one. - How would you manage the differences between Squeak and Pharo universes? I think it is extremely important that the Pharo-1.0 universe contains only stable and working packages that do not conflict. I don't want to see unstable packages or packages that in some combinations do not load. Therefore, I don't think that managing a separate universe for Pharo is that much more work since the main work is to make sure that the packages that are added conform to our high standards. Cheers, Adrian BTW, when I try to install Seaside in Pharo using Packages I get the following error: PackageInfo>>doesNotUnderstand: #propertyAt:put: On Dec 22, 2008, at 10:35 , Damien Cassou wrote:
On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 11:16 AM, Adrian Lienhard <adi@netstyle.ch> wrote:
In a recent discussion with Marcus and Lukas we came to the conclusion that a package universe for Pharo 1.0 would be the best solution.
As the main maintainer of the dev Universe for Squeak 3.9-3.10 and Pharo, I have to disagree. Having a separate Universe for Pharo will be a pain. For each new version of a package, I will have to publish it to both the dev Universe and the Pharo universe. I advise you to use Packages instead for which subclassing is possible between distributions. That way, I could update one class and the other is automatically updated. Packages loads very easily inside Pharo and does not require overrides.
Installer install: 'Packages'
Have a look at the script here: http://installer.pbwiki.com/Packages-Pharo0:1
-- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
BTW, when I try to install Seaside in Pharo using Packages I get the following error: PackageInfo>>doesNotUnderstand: #propertyAt:put:
In a standard squeak image there are several lists of "what is currently installed", and these get out of sync quite easily. The PackageInfo and PackagesOrganizer in MC1.5/LPF aims to provide a service to other tools such as SM, Packages, and MC, keeping one master "what is installed" list. Keith
Keith Hodges wrote:
BTW, when I try to install Seaside in Pharo using Packages I get the following error: PackageInfo>>doesNotUnderstand: #propertyAt:put:
In a standard squeak image there are several lists of "what is currently installed", and these get out of sync quite easily. The PackageInfo and PackagesOrganizer in MC1.5/LPF aims to provide a service to other tools such as SM, Packages, and MC, keeping one master "what is installed" list.
Keith
At present Sake/Packages does keep its own list of what is installed in (Packages provided), however it tells each PackageInfo which 'Packages' entry was used to load it. This in theory allows Packages to be unloaded and to be able to reconstruct its provided list from the PackageOrganizer master list. Packages also uses this to provide Monticello wth menus for "upgrade" and "unload" from 'Sake/Packages'. S/P uses the property dictionary as follows.... #addToPackageInfo " Here we tell the PackageInfo instance what name was used to load it. if a package appears in PackageInfo under a different name to which it appears in Packages, the PackageInfo name can be told to us via metadata #mcName: Example: 'Seaside' is in PackageInfo as 'Seaside2'. " I have changed this code to only use propertyAt:put on PackageInfo if it is there. Keith p.s. One of the goals of LPF for all images is to provide a platform that enables new code NOT to have to be backwardly compatible since LPF can take up the slack. I find it ironic that Pharo is suffering from backward compataibility issues, and I have to put "respondsTo:" just to cover pharo's back.
Adrian Lienhard wrote:
Hi Damien,
Let me try to understand your suggestion. You would use Sake-Packages instead of a Universe. As far as I see, a Sake-Package models the same information as one in a Universe (that is, name, description, dependencies, source location, etc.), right? Hence, the main difference is that this information can be managed with MC instead of a XML. Furthermore, as you suggest, we could share package definitions between different Pharo versions and even between Pharo and Squeak.
Questions: - Is there a GUI frontend for Sack-Packages like for Universes? I think some way is needed to allow people more easily browser the provided packages. If it didn't exist, which I expect, I assume it would not be hard to build one.
Browsing is done via a Class browser.
- How do users that already have installed Sacke-Packages (I guess we would pre-install it in the Pharo distro), get the most recent version of the package definitions? Obviously, they should always automatically get the most recent one.
Installer ss project: 'Packages'; install: 'Packages-Library'. or Packages current load: 'Packages'. or (for short) Packages update.
- How would you manage the differences between Squeak and Pharo universes? PackagesDev is the superclass of both PackagesPharo01 and PackagesSqueak310 so you simply have to move the definitions to the appropriate place.
I would hope that as many packages as possible stay compatible with both, and can remain in the PackagesDev superclass. However I expect to have to provide compatability features that enable Pharo reliant packages to be supported in Squeak. (i.e. Author) Keith
I do not understand what you are saying.
p.s. One of the goals of LPF for all images is to provide a platform that enables new code NOT to have to be backwardly compatible since LPF can take up the slack. I find it ironic that Pharo is suffering from backward compataibility issues, and I have to put "respondsTo:" just to cover pharo's back.
participants (6)
-
Adrian Lienhard -
Alexandre Bergel -
Bill Schwab -
Damien Cassou -
Keith Hodges -
Stéphane Ducasse