Great, it seems I've managed to upload the fix. *The issue number* is 15417 *This is the result of the commit* Name: SUnit-UI-SergioFedi.111 Author: SergioFedi Time: 27 April 2015, 7:16:53.814736 pm UUID: cbc836f0-a6bf-4847-a3be-da8b2b67657a Ancestors: SUnit-UI-TheIntegrator.110 Added runCovergae button and it's corresponding functionality. Note: unlike what it says in the video, I didn't ask for rights to submit, I simply made and account and submitted the change. Is there anything else I should do? Also, feel free to point me to any kind of mistake or breach in protocol I've made.

Sergio This video explains in step 4 how to create a slice. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iFomI-7h4qQ hth On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 7:32 PM, Sergio Fedi <sergio.fedi@gmail.com> wrote:

One thing I previously missed: marking it as resolved (and in need for a peer review)

Already done that at:

https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/resolve/15417/TestRunner-does-not-offer-th...

​

-- Bernardo E.C. Sent from a cheap desktop computer in South America.

yes, i have done that. :) But now, i save the slice in a local repository (a simple directory) and test that slice in a fresh image, i try to merge it (see the changes and merge them) and then i copy the slice(that also will copy the related packages) from my local repository to the inbox. On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 8:31 PM, Sergio Fedi <sergio.fedi@gmail.com> wrote:

I was following that video.

And now I'm pretty sure my blunder was caused because I kept the package selected after revieweing the Changes.

So instead of aving the Slice, I saved only the package.

​Thanks for the patience :)

-- Bernardo E.C. Sent from a cheap desktop computer in South America.

sergio, if you submit a slice to the inbox and change the status to Resolved (Fix Review Needed), the monkey (CI) will test your slice and inform you the result. On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 9:18 PM, Sergio Fedi <sergio.fedi@gmail.com> wrote:

Great!​

I suppose the bug system will inform me when you finally resolve the case, right?

-- Bernardo E.C. Sent from a cheap desktop computer in South America.

Oh, great, I misunderstood. Glad you clarified that. I'm gonna do it now. ​

Another thing is that Pharo4 is now stable… we try to only fix real show stoppers. And in all cases, we do it first in the current development version (Pharo5 now).

On 28 Apr 2015, at 02:57, Sergio Fedi <sergio.fedi@gmail.com> wrote:

Uploaded and marked as solved.

​Let's see how it goes.

I will add an issue for Pharo5 and itegrate there first for testing.

Done and integrated.

(And later we can use this as an example for the new reflective features of Pharo5… Right now this is implemented with a simple compiled method wrapper, which we can replace with a meta-link on the method later).

This will then allow us to even do it not just for methods, but per AST-Node, too. Marcus

Yes In the site it says that it is preferable via surface mail. But a fax is good enough. Does this still hold true? (if so, I would rather send it via fax, or scanned, or another medium)

INRIA style. sounds like super bureaucracy, but let me tell you, without going into details, that at least once it has proven useful :) Esteban

On 02 May 2015, at 01:29, Peter Uhnák <i.uhnak@gmail.com> wrote:

On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 7:44 PM, stepharo <stepharo@free.fr <mailto:stepharo@free.fr>> wrote: Could you send the license agreement and send it to us?

Ha! I completely forgot about doing this. I'm just surprised that legally having somewhere written something like "by contributing to blablabla you agree with license blablabla" is not enough.

Peter