Hi, We have to generate a new .source file. We will do that for 40606. This means that there will be two versions of 40606: one that has a V3 Sources and one with a V4 source. To not get confused, the best is to wait for 607. Marcus
Great. Thanks for the heads up. Cheers, Doru On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
Hi,
We have to generate a new .source file. We will do that for 40606.
This means that there will be two versions of 40606: one that has a V3 Sources and one with a V4 source. To not get confused, the best is to wait for 607.
Marcus
-- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"
We have to generate a new .source file. We will do that for 40606.
This means that there will be two versions of 40606: one that has a V3 Sources and one with a V4 source. To not get confused, the best is to wait for 607.
Ok: -> sources file is on http://files.pharo.org/sources/ <http://files.pharo.org/sources/> -> the latest image (40606) use it: http://files.pharo.org/image/40/latest.zip <http://files.pharo.org/image/40/latest.zip> Next: - fix get.pharo.org <http://get.pharo.org/> - fix the scripts that build the downloads - do a 607 Marcus
On 13 Apr 2015, at 15:48, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
We have to generate a new .source file. We will do that for 40606.
This means that there will be two versions of 40606: one that has a V3 Sources and one with a V4 source. To not get confused, the best is to wait for 607.
Ok:
-> sources file is on http://files.pharo.org/sources/ <http://files.pharo.org/sources/>
-> the latest image (40606) use it:
http://files.pharo.org/image/40/latest.zip <http://files.pharo.org/image/40/latest.zip>
Next:
- fix get.pharo.org <http://get.pharo.org/> - fix the scripts that build the downloads - do a 607
We did it all. Result: it is all broken. We will revert it all. What do we learn from it? The artefact on the build server needs to be the artefact of release. Everything that does not support this needs to be changes. Marcus
Is there anything we can do to help now? Doru On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2015, at 15:48, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
We have to generate a new .source file. We will do that for 40606.
This means that there will be two versions of 40606: one that has a V3 Sources and one with a V4 source. To not get confused, the best is to wait for 607.
Ok:
-> sources file is on http://files.pharo.org/sources/
-> the latest image (40606) use it:
http://files.pharo.org/image/40/latest.zip
Next:
- fix get.pharo.org - fix the scripts that build the downloads - do a 607
We did it all.
Result: it is all broken. We will revert it all.
What do we learn from it? The artefact on the build server needs to be the artefact of release. Everything that does not support this needs to be changes.
Marcus
-- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"
On 13 Apr 2015, at 16:17, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2015, at 15:48, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
We have to generate a new .source file. We will do that for 40606.
This means that there will be two versions of 40606: one that has a V3 Sources and one with a V4 source. To not get confused, the best is to wait for 607.
Ok:
-> sources file is on http://files.pharo.org/sources/
-> the latest image (40606) use it:
http://files.pharo.org/image/40/latest.zip
Next:
- fix get.pharo.org - fix the scripts that build the downloads - do a 607
We did it all.
Result: it is all broken. We will revert it all.
All broken is a bit harsh, but yes this is not fun.
What do we learn from it? The artefact on the build server needs to be the artefact of release. Everything that does not support this needs to be changes.
Yes, of course.
Marcus
On 13 Apr 2015, at 16:28, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2015, at 16:17, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2015, at 15:48, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
We have to generate a new .source file. We will do that for 40606.
This means that there will be two versions of 40606: one that has a V3 Sources and one with a V4 source. To not get confused, the best is to wait for 607.
Ok:
-> sources file is on http://files.pharo.org/sources/
-> the latest image (40606) use it:
http://files.pharo.org/image/40/latest.zip
Next:
- fix get.pharo.org - fix the scripts that build the downloads - do a 607
We did it all.
Result: it is all broken. We will revert it all.
All broken is a bit harsh, but yes this is not fun.
It is all broken: when you look at a class comment it shows you parts of method sources. Marcus
Yes, that is bad. Can you write a short mail or issue entry about what you did exactly, so that others can try to debug this situation ?
On 13 Apr 2015, at 16:32, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2015, at 16:28, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2015, at 16:17, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2015, at 15:48, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
We have to generate a new .source file. We will do that for 40606.
This means that there will be two versions of 40606: one that has a V3 Sources and one with a V4 source. To not get confused, the best is to wait for 607.
Ok:
-> sources file is on http://files.pharo.org/sources/
-> the latest image (40606) use it:
http://files.pharo.org/image/40/latest.zip
Next:
- fix get.pharo.org - fix the scripts that build the downloads - do a 607
We did it all.
Result: it is all broken. We will revert it all.
All broken is a bit harsh, but yes this is not fun.
It is all broken: when you look at a class comment it shows you parts of method sources.
Marcus
On 13 Apr 2015, at 16:35, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu> wrote:
Yes, that is bad.
Can you write a short mail or issue entry about what you did exactly, so that others can try to debug this situation ?
I did PharoSourcesCondenser condenseNewSources and the after the class comment of LargePositiveInteger is empty, the class comment of others are wrong. (e.g. LargeNegativeInteger is "s ^ separatorsâ Marcus
On 13 Apr 2015, at 16:49, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2015, at 16:35, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu> wrote:
Yes, that is bad.
Can you write a short mail or issue entry about what you did exactly, so that others can try to debug this situation ?
I did
PharoSourcesCondenser condenseNewSources
and the after the class comment of LargePositiveInteger is empty, the class comment of others are wrong. (e.g. LargeNegativeInteger is
"s ^ separatorsâ
The method sources seem to be ok: I can recompile everything with no problem. (that I tested already some weeks ago not to run into the famous âcondense sources does not workâ issue a day before the release⦠of course, it was not enough). Marcus
On 13 Apr 2015, at 16:52, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2015, at 16:49, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2015, at 16:35, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu> wrote:
Yes, that is bad.
Can you write a short mail or issue entry about what you did exactly, so that others can try to debug this situation ?
I did
PharoSourcesCondenser condenseNewSources
and the after the class comment of LargePositiveInteger is empty, the class comment of others are wrong. (e.g. LargeNegativeInteger is
"s ^ separatorsâ
The method sources seem to be ok: I can recompile everything with no problem. (that I tested already some weeks ago not to run into the famous âcondense sources does not workâ issue a day before the release⦠of course, it was not enough).
I think we fixed it⦠slice incoming. Marcus
On 13 Apr 2015, at 17:35, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2015, at 16:52, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2015, at 16:49, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2015, at 16:35, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu> wrote:
Yes, that is bad.
Can you write a short mail or issue entry about what you did exactly, so that others can try to debug this situation ?
I did
PharoSourcesCondenser condenseNewSources
and the after the class comment of LargePositiveInteger is empty, the class comment of others are wrong. (e.g. LargeNegativeInteger is
"s ^ separatorsâ
The method sources seem to be ok: I can recompile everything with no problem. (that I tested already some weeks ago not to run into the famous âcondense sources does not workâ issue a day before the release⦠of course, it was not enough).
I think we fixed it⦠slice incoming.
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15336/Writing-a-new-souces-brakes-class-co... <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15336/Writing-a-new-souces-brakes-class-co...> Marcus
2015-04-13 17:38 GMT+02:00 Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr>:
On 13 Apr 2015, at 17:35, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2015, at 16:52, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2015, at 16:49, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 13 Apr 2015, at 16:35, Sven Van Caekenberghe <sven@stfx.eu> wrote:
Yes, that is bad.
Can you write a short mail or issue entry about what you did exactly, so that others can try to debug this situation ?
I did
PharoSourcesCondenser condenseNewSources
and the after the class comment of LargePositiveInteger is empty, the class comment of others are wrong. (e.g. LargeNegativeInteger is
"s ^ separatorsâ
The method sources seem to be ok: I can recompile everything with no problem. (that I tested already some weeks ago not to run into the famous âcondense sources does not workâ issue a day before the release⦠of course, it was not enough).
I think we fixed it⦠slice incoming.
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/15336/Writing-a-new-souces-brakes-class-co...
Marcus
Very good idea to use brakes when changes are coming too fast ;)
Hi, A next try based on 40607 we will: -> generate sources from that (DONE) -> upload to http://files.pharo.org/sources/ <http://files.pharo.org/sources/> -> upload image (TODO) -> fix zeroconf (Next) -> fix build scripts (TODO) -> do an empty 608 for testing (TODO)
On 13 Apr 2015, at 15:03, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
Hi,
We have to generate a new .source file. We will do that for 40606.
This means that there will be two versions of 40606: one that has a V3 Sources and one with a V4 source. To not get confused, the best is to wait for 607.
Marcus
On 14 Apr 2015, at 10:06, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
Hi,
A next try based on 40607 we will:
-> generate sources from that (DONE) -> upload to http://files.pharo.org/sources/ <http://files.pharo.org/sources/> -> upload image (TODO) -> fix zeroconf (Next) -> fix build scripts (TODO) -> do an empty 608 for testing (TODO)
DONE! Marcus
Yuppee. I changed the Moose build to package the Pharo40.sources and it works fine. Doru On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 14 Apr 2015, at 10:06, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
Hi,
A next try based on 40607 we will:
-> generate sources from that (DONE) -> upload to http://files.pharo.org/sources/ -> upload image (TODO) -> fix zeroconf (Next) -> fix build scripts (TODO) -> do an empty 608 for testing (TODO)
DONE!
Marcus
-- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"
Works fine for me too, great work, thanks (again), Marcus.
On 14 Apr 2015, at 15:40, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Yuppee. I changed the Moose build to package the Pharo40.sources and it works fine.
Doru
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 12:45 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
On 14 Apr 2015, at 10:06, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker@inria.fr> wrote:
Hi,
A next try based on 40607 we will:
-> generate sources from that (DONE) -> upload to http://files.pharo.org/sources/ -> upload image (TODO) -> fix zeroconf (Next) -> fix build scripts (TODO) -> do an empty 608 for testing (TODO)
DONE!
Marcus
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
participants (4)
-
Marcus Denker -
Nicolas Cellier -
Sven Van Caekenberghe -
Tudor Girba