Roadmap to Pharo 7 Release
Does a high level overview exist of what still has to be done? Do we expect any more potentially-disruptive changes or are we in/near the stabilization phase? ----- Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html
still we have to release iceberg 0.7 then weâll see how we are there. and still we have to make a 64bit windows VM+image that works for us. and we still need to fix that annoying debug blocking all bug and of course, we have some leaks we still need to solve. I think all the other issues are covered (I need to check and I canât right now⦠but I have that feeling). cheers, Esteban
On 27 Mar 2018, at 19:47, Sean P. DeNigris <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
Does a high level overview exist of what still has to be done? Do we expect any more potentially-disruptive changes or are we in/near the stabilization phase?
----- Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html
So I take it Cargo will not be in P7? (Assuming Cargo is still being developed, which it currently isn't.) Thanks, Peter On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 8:11 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
still we have to release iceberg 0.7 then weâll see how we are there. and still we have to make a 64bit windows VM+image that works for us. and we still need to fix that annoying debug blocking all bug and of course, we have some leaks we still need to solve.
I think all the other issues are covered (I need to check and I canât right now⦠but I have that feeling).
cheers, Esteban
On 27 Mar 2018, at 19:47, Sean P. DeNigris <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
Does a high level overview exist of what still has to be done? Do we expect any more potentially-disruptive changes or are we in/near the stabilization phase?
----- Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837. html
Hi, btw, there is an interesting opened issue on Cargo's github page: https://github.com/demarey/cargo/issues/32 I wanted to let you know that the Rust programming language ships with a
package manager that is also called Cargo, which is a trademarked part of the project. There definitely seems to be scope for confusion around the name. Can we work together to figure something out?
It is opened by Aaron Turon, Mozilla developer. Any thoughts? Cheers, Alex On 27 March 2018 at 20:29, Peter Uhnák <i.uhnak@gmail.com> wrote:
So I take it Cargo will not be in P7? (Assuming Cargo is still being developed, which it currently isn't.)
Thanks, Peter
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 8:11 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
still we have to release iceberg 0.7 then weâll see how we are there. and still we have to make a 64bit windows VM+image that works for us. and we still need to fix that annoying debug blocking all bug and of course, we have some leaks we still need to solve.
I think all the other issues are covered (I need to check and I canât right now⦠but I have that feeling).
cheers, Esteban
On 27 Mar 2018, at 19:47, Sean P. DeNigris <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
Does a high level overview exist of what still has to be done? Do we expect any more potentially-disruptive changes or are we in/near the stabilization phase?
----- Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.ht ml
Yes we will rename it: Panier ou Cabas you see the stuff old ladies are using to go shopping :) Now we are not in hurry. It should work first. On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 8:37 PM, Aliaksei Syrel <alex.syrel@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi,
btw, there is an interesting opened issue on Cargo's github page: https://github.com/demarey/cargo/issues/32
I wanted to let you know that the Rust programming language ships with a package manager that is also called Cargo, which is a trademarked part of the project. There definitely seems to be scope for confusion around the name. Can we work together to figure something out?
It is opened by Aaron Turon, Mozilla developer.
Any thoughts?
Cheers, Alex
On 27 March 2018 at 20:29, Peter Uhnák <i.uhnak@gmail.com> wrote:
So I take it Cargo will not be in P7? (Assuming Cargo is still being developed, which it currently isn't.)
Thanks, Peter
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 8:11 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
still we have to release iceberg 0.7 then weâll see how we are there. and still we have to make a 64bit windows VM+image that works for us. and we still need to fix that annoying debug blocking all bug and of course, we have some leaks we still need to solve.
I think all the other issues are covered (I need to check and I canât right now⦠but I have that feeling).
cheers, Esteban
On 27 Mar 2018, at 19:47, Sean P. DeNigris <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
Does a high level overview exist of what still has to be done? Do we expect any more potentially-disruptive changes or are we in/near the stabilization phase?
----- Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html
- [easy] I want to have a package with all the deprecatedTransform from Pharo current and paste versions. - should check the removal of FTPlugin (tx tx tx pablo) - newline abstraction because we should stop to have cr all the way? - Clap command-line (yes damien please push) - Remove Versionner, Komitter, Nautilus - Improve calypso We are working on Spec2. Denis is working on an architecture: - no more adapter - no more interpreter - working with Morphic and Bloc. So we will see. As soon as it feels ok I would like to rewrite many tools with it. And we will need help. Since Glamour is not really maintained anymore and source of some leaks and problems, we want to remove any users except GTTools. Stef On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 7:47 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
Does a high level overview exist of what still has to be done? Do we expect any more potentially-disruptive changes or are we in/near the stabilization phase?
----- Cheers, Sean -- Sent from: http://forum.world.st/Pharo-Smalltalk-Developers-f1294837.html
Iceberg :) And all the user of Glamour that are not GT. Stef On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 9:28 PM, Peter Uhnák <i.uhnak@gmail.com> wrote:
Since Glamour is not really maintained anymore and source of some leaks and problems, we want to remove any users except GTTools.
Can you please provide more info on this? What exactly is going to be removed?
Thanks, Peter
What does this means for end users? I use Glamour extensively... does it mean that I will have to abandon all that code, or just that I need to load Glamour explicitly? Thanks, Peter On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 4:01 PM, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self@gmail.com> wrote:
Iceberg :) And all the user of Glamour that are not GT.
Stef
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 9:28 PM, Peter Uhnák <i.uhnak@gmail.com> wrote:
Since Glamour is not really maintained anymore and source of some leaks and problems, we want to remove any users except GTTools.
Can you please provide more info on this? What exactly is going to be removed?
Thanks, Peter
On 31 Mar 2018, at 17:17, Peter Uhnák <i.uhnak@gmail.com> wrote:
What does this means for end users?
nothing. we are removing some *users* of glamour. Not glamour itself and certainly not the gttools that use glamour intensively (and they allow easy extension).
I use Glamour extensively... does it mean that I will have to abandon all that code, or just that I need to load Glamour explicitly?
Glamour is not leaving the image! cheers, Esteban ps: but there are leaks around we would like to discover how and when they happen (because they are not so many and not evident). Any help there is welcome :)
Thanks, Peter
On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 4:01 PM, Stephane Ducasse <stepharo.self@gmail.com <mailto:stepharo.self@gmail.com>> wrote: Iceberg :) And all the user of Glamour that are not GT.
Stef
On Tue, Mar 27, 2018 at 9:28 PM, Peter Uhnák <i.uhnak@gmail.com <mailto:i.uhnak@gmail.com>> wrote:
Since Glamour is not really maintained anymore and source of some leaks and problems, we want to remove any users except GTTools.
Can you please provide more info on this? What exactly is going to be removed?
Thanks, Peter
On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 7:52 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
On 31 Mar 2018, at 17:17, Peter Uhnák <i.uhnak@gmail.com> wrote:
What does this means for end users?
nothing. we are removing some *users* of glamour. Not glamour itself and certainly not the gttools that use glamour intensively (and they allow easy extension).
Aaah. My heart skipped originally, now I am at peace. :) ps: but there are leaks around we would like to discover how and when they
happen (because they are not so many and not evident). Any help there is welcome :)
I'll keep that in mind, although I don't usually check whether there are any pointers dangling. Thanks! Peter
Hi Peter Now we do not want to rely on Glamour. You should pay attention since it is not maintained and producing memory leaks and we would like to avoid to have to fight to find them. I do not know what are the plans of feenk at this level. This is why we started to redesign Spec. Stef On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 8:58 PM, Peter Uhnák <i.uhnak@gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 7:52 PM, Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm@gmail.com> wrote:
On 31 Mar 2018, at 17:17, Peter Uhnák <i.uhnak@gmail.com> wrote:
What does this means for end users?
nothing. we are removing some *users* of glamour. Not glamour itself and certainly not the gttools that use glamour intensively (and they allow easy extension).
Aaah. My heart skipped originally, now I am at peace. :)
ps: but there are leaks around we would like to discover how and when they happen (because they are not so many and not evident). Any help there is welcome :)
I'll keep that in mind, although I don't usually check whether there are any pointers dangling.
Thanks! Peter
participants (5)
-
Aliaksei Syrel -
Esteban Lorenzano -
Peter Uhnák -
Sean P. DeNigris -
Stephane Ducasse