Put issues from cog issue tracker into pharo issue tracker
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?pre=preSaveFilterProject&ixProject=6 They are under the Pharo-VM project. That way we can handle them easily. Guille
On 7 August 2013 17:56, Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito@gmail.com> wrote:
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?pre=preSaveFilterProject&ixProject=6
They are under the Pharo-VM project.
That way we can handle them easily.
I don't like this move. If moving issues from one tracker to another would help fixing them in some magical way, i would be doing this every day.
Guille
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
On Aug 7, 2013, at 6:34 PM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
On 7 August 2013 17:56, Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito@gmail.com> wrote:
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?pre=preSaveFilterProject&ixProject=6
They are under the Pharo-VM project.
That way we can handle them easily.
I don't like this move.
why having everything in a single place is good.
If moving issues from one tracker to another would help fixing them in some magical way, i would be doing this every day.
Guille
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
On 7 August 2013 19:06, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
On Aug 7, 2013, at 6:34 PM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
On 7 August 2013 17:56, Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito@gmail.com> wrote:
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?pre=preSaveFilterProject&ixProject=6
They are under the Pharo-VM project.
That way we can handle them easily.
I don't like this move.
why
having everything in a single place is good.
That's exactly what i was thinking about when registered cog issue tracker. And since Cog used not just by Pharo, it deserves own separate repository. Now i would like to know, if somebody asked people who contributing to Cog development but not to Pharo, if they would like to use Pharo issue tracker for that. Or maybe we don't have to care, then doing like this is a way to piss them off. -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
That's exactly what i was thinking about when registered cog issue tracker. And since Cog used not just by Pharo, it deserves own separate repository.
Now i would like to know, if somebody asked people who contributing to Cog development but not to Pharo, if they would like to use Pharo issue tracker for that.
Or maybe we don't have to care, then doing like this is a way to piss them off.
Indeed this is the drawback. So when we close something on pharo and that it contributes to cog we should update the cog one.
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
I think that's not true at all. Our git repo and our vmmaker repo are used to build only the pharo vm flavor. If we make a fix it does not get magically integrated into eliots cog. Maybe they can benefit from the changes but they have to merge back as you esteban and igor merge in our branch. Le 7 août 2013 20:10, "Stéphane Ducasse" <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> a écrit :
That's exactly what i was thinking about when registered cog issue tracker. And since Cog used not just by Pharo, it deserves own separate repository.
Now i would like to know, if somebody asked people who contributing to Cog development but not to Pharo, if they would like to use Pharo issue tracker for that.
Or maybe we don't have to care, then doing like this is a way to piss them off.
Indeed this is the drawback. So when we close something on pharo and that it contributes to cog we should update the cog one.
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
Well, my intent was to keep working together on it and be as open as possible to people who may not work particularly on Pharo, but care/use Cog. Now my dilemma is, what is the fate of Cog tracker? On 7 August 2013 20:29, Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito@gmail.com> wrote:
I think that's not true at all.
Our git repo and our vmmaker repo are used to build only the pharo vm flavor. If we make a fix it does not get magically integrated into eliots cog.
Guillermo , it is not 'our' and never been. It belongs to community, and Pharo is just part of it. I had hard time convincing people to join and use git and tracker.. Now this move puts a big cross on all these efforts. Of course i understand the benefits of having everything at one place. And of course we (as Pharo team) are free to organize own work in a way we see fit. But i don't think we will find understanding if we start privatizing things which are not belong to us. Because initially this stuff was created without intent to be 'pharo-only' or for 'pharo-only'.
Maybe they can benefit from the changes but they have to merge back as you esteban and igor merge in our branch.
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
On Aug 7, 2013, at 8:44 PM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
Well, my intent was to keep working together on it and be as open as possible to people who may not work particularly on Pharo, but care/use Cog.
Now my dilemma is, what is the fate of Cog tracker?
On 7 August 2013 20:29, Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito@gmail.com> wrote:
I think that's not true at all.
Our git repo and our vmmaker repo are used to build only the pharo vm flavor. If we make a fix it does not get magically integrated into eliots cog.
Guillermo , it is not 'our' and never been. It belongs to community, and Pharo is just part of it. I had hard time convincing people to join and use git and tracker.. Now this move puts a big cross on all these efforts.
Of course i understand the benefits of having everything at one place. And of course we (as Pharo team) are free to organize own work in a way we see fit.
indeed but do not see the devil everywhere why putting the issue on a public tracker means private?
But i don't think we will find understanding if we start privatizing things which are not belong to us. Because initially this stuff was created without intent to be 'pharo-only' or for 'pharo-only'.
You see that clement is implementing clean blocks and that eliot wants to integrate his work in COG. Stef
Maybe they can benefit from the changes but they have to merge back as you esteban and igor merge in our branch.
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
On 8 August 2013 09:05, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
On Aug 7, 2013, at 8:44 PM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
Well, my intent was to keep working together on it and be as open as possible to people who may not work particularly on Pharo, but care/use Cog.
Now my dilemma is, what is the fate of Cog tracker?
On 7 August 2013 20:29, Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito@gmail.com> wrote:
I think that's not true at all.
Our git repo and our vmmaker repo are used to build only the pharo vm flavor. If we make a fix it does not get magically integrated into eliots cog.
Guillermo , it is not 'our' and never been. It belongs to community, and Pharo is just part of it. I had hard time convincing people to join and use git and tracker.. Now this move puts a big cross on all these efforts.
Of course i understand the benefits of having everything at one place. And of course we (as Pharo team) are free to organize own work in a way we see fit.
indeed but do not see the devil everywhere why putting the issue on a public tracker means private?
well, perhaps then someone should communicate to me (and others) in detail, what it is about? and perhaps such actions should be communicated before doing?
But i don't think we will find understanding if we start privatizing things which are not belong to us. Because initially this stuff was created without intent to be 'pharo-only' or for 'pharo-only'.
You see that clement is implementing clean blocks and that eliot wants to integrate his work in COG.
Stef
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
On Thu, 8 Aug 2013, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On Aug 7, 2013, at 8:44 PM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
Well, my intent was to keep working together on it and be as open as possible to people who may not work particularly on Pharo, but care/use Cog.
Now my dilemma is, what is the fate of Cog tracker?
On 7 August 2013 20:29, Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito@gmail.com> wrote:
I think that's not true at all.
Our git repo and our vmmaker repo are used to build only the pharo vm flavor. If we make a fix it does not get magically integrated into eliots cog.
Guillermo , it is not 'our' and never been. It belongs to community, and Pharo is just part of it. I had hard time convincing people to join and use git and tracker.. Now this move puts a big cross on all these efforts.
Of course i understand the benefits of having everything at one place. And of course we (as Pharo team) are free to organize own work in a way we see fit.
indeed but do not see the devil everywhere why putting the issue on a public tracker means private?
How is that a "public tracker"? Levente
But i don't think we will find understanding if we start privatizing things which are not belong to us. Because initially this stuff was created without intent to be 'pharo-only' or for 'pharo-only'.
You see that clement is implementing clean blocks and that eliot wants to integrate his work in COG.
Stef
Maybe they can benefit from the changes but they have to merge back as you esteban and igor merge in our branch.
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
I sent this mail to the vm mailing list: "I mirrored the issues from the cog issue tracker inside the pharo one, so they have more visibility for people only working the pharo issue tracker. Issues in both trackers have a link pointing to its pair, in case someone wants to do the follow up. In any case, my idea was to enhance visibility and use one tool for all issues, not to deprecate either issue tracker. In the meanwhile I saw there are many issues that are probably already integrated, others that probably deserve to have a look and integrate them :). And of course, I realized that I the issue tracker spammed seriously this list. I apologize for that! Best, Guille" I guess that solves the question around the fate of the cog issue tracker: I didn't mean a deprecation or similar, people can continue using it as they want. I put for that links so people can go back and forth between the issue trackers. My unique and good intention was to make those issues more visible. On Thu, Aug 8, 2013 at 1:35 PM, Levente Uzonyi <leves@elte.hu> wrote:
On Thu, 8 Aug 2013, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On Aug 7, 2013, at 8:44 PM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
Well, my intent was to keep working together on it and be as open as
possible to people who may not work particularly on Pharo, but care/use Cog.
Now my dilemma is, what is the fate of Cog tracker?
On 7 August 2013 20:29, Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito@gmail.com> wrote:
I think that's not true at all.
Our git repo and our vmmaker repo are used to build only the pharo vm flavor. If we make a fix it does not get magically integrated into eliots cog.
Guillermo , it is not 'our' and never been. It belongs to community, and Pharo is just part of it. I had hard time convincing people to join and use git and tracker.. Now this move puts a big cross on all these efforts.
Of course i understand the benefits of having everything at one place. And of course we (as Pharo team) are free to organize own work in a way we see fit.
indeed but do not see the devil everywhere why putting the issue on a public tracker means private?
How is that a "public tracker"?
Levente
But i don't think we will find understanding if we start privatizing
things which are not belong to us. Because initially this stuff was created without intent to be 'pharo-only' or for 'pharo-only'.
You see that clement is implementing clean blocks and that eliot wants to integrate his work in COG.
Stef
Maybe they can benefit from the changes but they have to merge back as
you esteban and igor merge in our branch.
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
On 8 August 2013 14:14, Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito@gmail.com> wrote:
I guess that solves the question around the fate of the cog issue tracker: I didn't mean a deprecation or similar, people can continue using it as they want. I put for that links so people can go back and forth between the issue trackers. My unique and good intention was to make those issues more visible.
Thanks, Guillermo. I think everyone understands that your intention was for good, but when you don't inform people properly they tend to think worst (including me) :) -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
On Aug 8, 2013, at 3:03 , Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8 August 2013 14:14, Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito@gmail.com> wrote:
I guess that solves the question around the fate of the cog issue tracker: I didn't mean a deprecation or similar, people can continue using it as they want. I put for that links so people can go back and forth between the issue trackers. My unique and good intention was to make those issues more visible.
Thanks, Guillermo. I think everyone understands that your intention was for good, but when you don't inform people properly they tend to think worst (including me)
:)
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
Especially when you end up spamming VM-dev with Cog issue tracker updates saying "Moved to fogbugz". Even with the modified updates, why you'd need to mirror an existing tracker for a related but distinct project into the Pharo tracker, with the synchronization issues that might cause, js still a bit beyond me. Cheers, Henry
We have gotten well over 100 updates to the vm-dev list for issues being moved around between various issue trackers. This is excessive and seems to be of little relevance to the vm-dev list. As list admin for the vm-dev list, I am responsible for keeping things like this under control. Unless I hear a convincing argument to the contrary, I will disable the cog@googlecode.com updates 24 hours from now. Dave On Thu, Aug 08, 2013 at 04:04:44PM +0200, Henrik Johansen wrote:
On Aug 8, 2013, at 3:03 , Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8 August 2013 14:14, Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito@gmail.com> wrote:
I guess that solves the question around the fate of the cog issue tracker: I didn't mean a deprecation or similar, people can continue using it as they want. I put for that links so people can go back and forth between the issue trackers. My unique and good intention was to make those issues more visible.
Thanks, Guillermo. I think everyone understands that your intention was for good, but when you don't inform people properly they tend to think worst (including me)
:)
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
Especially when you end up spamming VM-dev with Cog issue tracker updates saying "Moved to fogbugz". Even with the modified updates, why you'd need to mirror an existing tracker for a related but distinct project into the Pharo tracker, with the synchronization issues that might cause, js still a bit beyond me.
Cheers, Henry
On 8 August 2013 13:35, Levente Uzonyi <leves@elte.hu> wrote:
On Thu, 8 Aug 2013, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On Aug 7, 2013, at 8:44 PM, Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
Well, my intent was to keep working together on it and be as open as possible to people who may not work particularly on Pharo, but care/use Cog.
Now my dilemma is, what is the fate of Cog tracker?
On 7 August 2013 20:29, Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito@gmail.com> wrote:
I think that's not true at all.
Our git repo and our vmmaker repo are used to build only the pharo vm flavor. If we make a fix it does not get magically integrated into eliots cog.
Guillermo , it is not 'our' and never been. It belongs to community, and Pharo is just part of it. I had hard time convincing people to join and use git and tracker.. Now this move puts a big cross on all these efforts.
Of course i understand the benefits of having everything at one place. And of course we (as Pharo team) are free to organize own work in a way we see fit.
indeed but do not see the devil everywhere why putting the issue on a public tracker means private?
How is that a "public tracker"?
can you elaborate? https://pharo.fogbugz.com/ is publicly accessible, no? or what makes you think it is not public?
Levente
But i don't think we will find understanding if we start privatizing things which are not belong to us. Because initially this stuff was created without intent to be 'pharo-only' or for 'pharo-only'.
You see that clement is implementing clean blocks and that eliot wants to integrate his work in COG.
Stef
Maybe they can benefit from the changes but they have to merge back as you esteban and igor merge in our branch.
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8 August 2013 13:35, Levente Uzonyi <leves@elte.hu> wrote: > > On Thu, 8 Aug 2013, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > > g the issue on a public tracker means private? > > > > > > How is that a "public tracker"? > > > > can you elaborate? > https://pharo.fogbugz.com/ > is publicly accessible, no? or what makes you think it is not public? >
Take the first bug fix from the Pharo Summer release details at <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/10014/World-menu-System-Switch-User-s erves-no-purpose> This gives a the fogbugz log in page so to get info you need to login so not public (also are the bugs indexed by google?) -- Mark
that's a restriction made by the service we choose. issues are publicly visible here: http://bugs.pharo.org and there you also can register your self so you can also edit issues in fogbugz. so yes... is public in the "non-restricted access" meaning of the word. Esteban On Aug 8, 2013, at 4:57 PM, Mark Bestley <news{@bestley.co.uk> wrote:
Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8 August 2013 13:35, Levente Uzonyi <leves@elte.hu> wrote: > > On Thu, 8 Aug 2013, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > > g the issue on a public tracker means private? > > > > > > How is that a "public tracker"? > > > > can you elaborate? > https://pharo.fogbugz.com/ > is publicly accessible, no? or what makes you think it is not public? >
Take the first bug fix from the Pharo Summer release details at <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/10014/World-menu-System-Switch-User-s erves-no-purpose>
This gives a the fogbugz log in page so to get info you need to login so not public (also are the bugs indexed by google?)
-- Mark
well, strictly speaking, being indexed by google is not synonym to being public. (and, of course, that don't means we don't miss or want it) On 8 August 2013 18:10, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
that's a restriction made by the service we choose. issues are publicly visible here:
and there you also can register your self so you can also edit issues in fogbugz. so yes... is public in the "non-restricted access" meaning of the word.
Esteban
On Aug 8, 2013, at 4:57 PM, Mark Bestley <news{@bestley.co.uk> wrote:
Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8 August 2013 13:35, Levente Uzonyi <leves@elte.hu> wrote: > > On Thu, 8 Aug 2013, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > > g the issue on a public tracker means private? > > > > > > How is that a "public tracker"? > > > > can you elaborate? > https://pharo.fogbugz.com/ > is publicly accessible, no? or what makes you think it is not public? >
Take the first bug fix from the Pharo Summer release details at <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/10014/World-menu-System-Switch-User-s erves-no-purpose>
This gives a the fogbugz log in page so to get info you need to login so not public (also are the bugs indexed by google?)
-- Mark
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
On Thu, 8 Aug 2013, Esteban Lorenzano wrote:
that's a restriction made by the service we choose.
So it is you, who have chosen the restriction.
issues are publicly visible here:
and there you also can register your self so you can also edit issues in fogbugz. so yes... is public in the "non-restricted access" meaning of the word.
The barrier is way to high for anyone without an account to access the tracker. All links to issues on this mailing list point to fogbugz.com. Finding the matching issue on bugs.pharo.org seems to be kinda impossible. For example can you point me to the publicly visible link for this case https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/11144 (without checking pharo.fogbugz.com ofc)? Also bugs.pharo.org doesn't seem to be up-to-date. For example I can't find the recently moved issues from the Cog tracker. Levente
Esteban
On Aug 8, 2013, at 4:57 PM, Mark Bestley <news{@bestley.co.uk> wrote:
Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8 August 2013 13:35, Levente Uzonyi <leves@elte.hu> wrote: > > On Thu, 8 Aug 2013, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > > g the issue on a public tracker means private? > > > > > > How is that a "public tracker"? > > > > can you elaborate? > https://pharo.fogbugz.com/ > is publicly accessible, no? or what makes you think it is not public? >
Take the first bug fix from the Pharo Summer release details at <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/10014/World-menu-System-Switch-User-s erves-no-purpose>
This gives a the fogbugz log in page so to get info you need to login so not public (also are the bugs indexed by google?)
-- Mark
On Aug 8, 2013, at 7:37 PM, Levente Uzonyi <leves@elte.hu> wrote:
On Thu, 8 Aug 2013, Esteban Lorenzano wrote:
that's a restriction made by the service we choose.
So it is you, who have chosen the restriction.
issues are publicly visible here:
and there you also can register your self so you can also edit issues in fogbugz. so yes... is public in the "non-restricted access" meaning of the word.
The barrier is way to high for anyone without an account to access the tracker. All links to issues on this mailing list point to fogbugz.com. Finding the matching issue on bugs.pharo.org seems to be kinda impossible. For example can you point me to the publicly visible link for this case https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/11144 (without checking pharo.fogbugz.com ofc)?
Also bugs.pharo.org doesn't seem to be up-to-date. For example I can't find the recently moved issues from the Cog tracker.
Levente we did not take fogbuz because it forces people to log to edit bugs. We took it because google removed the script API of google code. We had really something else to do than to change a bug tracker when it was not the moment nor our wishes. Now fogbugz people nicely offered us to host and be able to use software that costs 25$ per site per month. So we decided to give a try and it has the cost that we cannot edit bugs without being log and a complex interface but we are happy that we do not have to run mantis or another bug tracker by ourselves. Now guillermo saw that squeakers use the squeak bug tracker to track Cog VM bugs so there is no point for us to have two bugtrackers to deal with. So this is simple I guess and this bug tracker stays a public one. Anybody on earth willing to have an access can get one. S.
Levente
Esteban
On Aug 8, 2013, at 4:57 PM, Mark Bestley <news{@bestley.co.uk> wrote:
Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
On 8 August 2013 13:35, Levente Uzonyi <leves@elte.hu> wrote: > > On Thu, 8 Aug 2013, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > > g the issue on a public tracker means private? > > > > > > How is that a "public tracker"? > > > > can you elaborate? > https://pharo.fogbugz.com/ > is publicly accessible, no? or what makes you think it is not public? >
Take the first bug fix from the Pharo Summer release details at <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/10014/World-menu-System-Switch-User-s erves-no-purpose>
This gives a the fogbugz log in page so to get info you need to login so not public (also are the bugs indexed by google?)
-- Mark
I must admit, that even despite that most of us grinding teeth when using it, it is quite good and people using it a lot. And service quality is also impressive: i don't remember we had any downtime, system errors or any other outages since started using it. -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
thanks, perfect! that's very nice, now we have everything in one place. Nobody besides Pharo guys touched this issue tracker anyway :) On 2013-08-07, at 12:56, Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito@gmail.com> wrote:
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?pre=preSaveFilterProject&ixProject=6
They are under the Pharo-VM project.
That way we can handle them easily.
Guille
On 9 August 2013 13:28, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni@gmail.com> wrote:
thanks, perfect!
that's very nice, now we have everything in one place. Nobody besides Pharo guys touched this issue tracker anyway :)
if that would be true, i wouldn't say anything.. The truth is that pharo team is most active on it.. yes. But does that give us right to decide what to do with it? -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
Nicolas Cellier, Are you willing to report and maintain VM bugs on the fogbugz issue tracker? Since you already filed reports on pharo.fogbugz.com I think this is not much of a change. thank you. On 2013-08-09, at 09:33, Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
On 9 August 2013 13:28, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni@gmail.com> wrote:
thanks, perfect!
that's very nice, now we have everything in one place. Nobody besides Pharo guys touched this issue tracker anyway :)
if that would be true, i wouldn't say anything..
The truth is that pharo team is most active on it.. yes. But does that give us right to decide what to do with it?
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko. <Screen Shot 2013-08-09 at 2.31.15 PM.png>
Reporting bugs on fogbugz is not a problem for me. However, the main concern I have is about the efficiency of these reports... Will Eliot have access to these reports and use them for his oscog branch? Will David have access for backporting some common bugs to interpreter VM? Will the reports be mailed to vm-dev? After all, I'm not really sure how the old bug tracker was usefull for oscog or interpreter VM... But I have the feeling that the reports on fogbugz will be for Pharo VM branch only. I'm very happy if I can be usefull to Pharo. But I'm even more if I can be usefull to Squeak/Cuis too for the same price, so I feel the move a bit like a loss. Cheers Nicolas 2013/8/10 Camillo Bruni <camillobruni@gmail.com>
Nicolas Cellier, Are you willing to report and maintain VM bugs on the fogbugz issue tracker? Since you already filed reports on pharo.fogbugz.com I think this is not much of a change.
thank you.
On 2013-08-09, at 09:33, Igor Stasenko <siguctua@gmail.com> wrote:
On 9 August 2013 13:28, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni@gmail.com> wrote:
thanks, perfect!
that's very nice, now we have everything in one place. Nobody besides Pharo guys touched this issue tracker anyway :)
if that would be true, i wouldn't say anything..
The truth is that pharo team is most active on it.. yes. But does that give us right to decide what to do with it?
-- Best regards, Igor Stasenko. <Screen Shot 2013-08-09 at 2.31.15 PM.png>
participants (10)
-
Camillo Bruni -
David T. Lewis -
Esteban Lorenzano -
Guillermo Polito -
Henrik Johansen -
Igor Stasenko -
Levente Uzonyi -
news{＠bestley.co.uk -
Nicolas Cellier -
Stéphane Ducasse