Re: [Pharo-dev] A thought about backporting
btc wrote:
OMG! I only just noticed on the "RELEASE" page [1] the linked file "Pharo2.0-win.zip" [3] >has a last-modified-date of 2013-11-13. What crack [2] are you smoking? A "released" >file with a name like "Pharo2.0-win.zip" should NEVER change its contents. NEVER! It >SHOULD always remain the same - always - to the end of time! Backports are really >important but they should be labelled as a new version "release" or just as "latest" if >regularly uploaded from the CI.
No. Releases on the website are for humans, not for automation. They should work and have all the latest backported bugfixes. Fixed versions for automation and sysadmins have build numbers. We have this covered with files.pharo.org Please read Van den Hamer & Lepoeter (1996) Managing Design Data: The Five Dimensions of CAD Frameworks, Configuration Management, and Product Data Management, Proceedings of the IEEE, Vol. 84, No 1, January 1996
On 2013-11-15, at 14:26, Stephan Eggermont <stephan@stack.nl> wrote:
btc wrote:
OMG! I only just noticed on the "RELEASE" page [1] the linked file "Pharo2.0-win.zip" [3] >has a last-modified-date of 2013-11-13. What crack [2] are you smoking? A "released" >file with a name like "Pharo2.0-win.zip" should NEVER change its contents. NEVER! It >SHOULD always remain the same - always - to the end of time! Backports are really >important but they should be labelled as a new version "release" or just as "latest" if >regularly uploaded from the CI.
No. Releases on the website are for humans, not for automation. They should work and have all the latest backported bugfixes. Fixed versions for automation and sysadmins have build numbers. We have this covered with files.pharo.org
I agree
On 15 November 2013 14:31, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni@gmail.com> wrote:
On 2013-11-15, at 14:26, Stephan Eggermont <stephan@stack.nl> wrote:
btc wrote:
OMG! I only just noticed on the "RELEASE" page [1] the linked file "Pharo2.0-win.zip" [3] >has a last-modified-date of 2013-11-13. What crack [2] are you smoking? A "released" >file with a name like "Pharo2.0-win.zip" should NEVER change its contents. NEVER! It >SHOULD always remain the same - always - to the end of time! Backports are really important but they should be labelled as a new version "release" or just as "latest" if >regularly uploaded from the CI.
No. Releases on the website are for humans, not for automation. They should work and have all the latest backported bugfixes. Fixed versions for automation and sysadmins have build numbers. We have this covered with files.pharo.org
I agree
from perspective of automation i also completely agree with Stephan. Just thought about it, what urls i used for downloads of other projects, and found it is usually bad idea to pick a download url from front page to build the rest of process on top of it. Because sites often changing, means urls as well.. or people adding registration/pay walls etc.. while if you using urls pointing to archive, it is meant to be non-changing over longer time period (possibly forever). -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
btc wrote
My apologies for how badly that poured out of me.
We all have bad days :) Actually, your passion may have awakened interest in this important topic. I agree with you - I've been pushing semantic versioning since Dale (IIRC) explained it to me. At the time, I think the barrier was adding to the burden of our poor integrators. But now that our CI process has become so automated, maybe this is the perfect time to revisit... ----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/A-thought-about-backporting-tp4722224p4722533.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
On Nov 15, 2013, at 7:05 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
btc wrote
My apologies for how badly that poured out of me.
We all have bad days :)
oh yes What is strange is that I did not see the original mail.I wonder if I lose mails.
Actually, your passion may have awakened interest in this important topic. I agree with you - I've been pushing semantic versioning since Dale (IIRC) explained it to me. At the time, I think the barrier was adding to the burden of our poor integrators. But now that our CI process has become so automated, maybe this is the perfect time to revisit...
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/A-thought-about-backporting-tp4722224p4722533.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Yeap definetly I have my bad days too like everyone so its ok btc. :) On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 6:59 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr
wrote:
On Nov 15, 2013, at 7:05 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
btc wrote
My apologies for how badly that poured out of me.
We all have bad days :)
oh yes What is strange is that I did not see the original mail.I wonder if I lose mails.
Actually, your passion may have awakened interest in this important
topic. I
agree with you - I've been pushing semantic versioning since Dale (IIRC) explained it to me. At the time, I think the barrier was adding to the burden of our poor integrators. But now that our CI process has become so automated, maybe this is the perfect time to revisit...
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/A-thought-about-backporting-tp4722224p4722533.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
Hi Stef, I think you should be happy that the finally you have a filter that filters out automatically all the negative energy mails :). Cheers, Doru On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr
wrote:
On Nov 15, 2013, at 7:05 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
btc wrote
My apologies for how badly that poured out of me.
We all have bad days :)
oh yes What is strange is that I did not see the original mail.I wonder if I lose mails.
Actually, your passion may have awakened interest in this important
topic. I
agree with you - I've been pushing semantic versioning since Dale (IIRC) explained it to me. At the time, I think the barrier was adding to the burden of our poor integrators. But now that our CI process has become so automated, maybe this is the perfect time to revisit...
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/A-thought-about-backporting-tp4722224p4722533.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-- www.tudorgirba.com "Every thing has its own flow"
On Nov 16, 2013, at 7:48 PM, Tudor Girba <tudor@tudorgirba.com> wrote:
Hi Stef,
I think you should be happy that the finally you have a filter that filters out automatically all the negative energy mails :).
I would love to have this addons and also for the negative mails I sent :) Stef
Cheers, Doru
On Sat, Nov 16, 2013 at 5:59 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse@inria.fr> wrote:
On Nov 15, 2013, at 7:05 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean@clipperadams.com> wrote:
btc wrote
My apologies for how badly that poured out of me.
We all have bad days :)
oh yes What is strange is that I did not see the original mail.I wonder if I lose mails.
Actually, your passion may have awakened interest in this important topic. I agree with you - I've been pushing semantic versioning since Dale (IIRC) explained it to me. At the time, I think the barrier was adding to the burden of our poor integrators. But now that our CI process has become so automated, maybe this is the perfect time to revisit...
----- Cheers, Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/A-thought-about-backporting-tp4722224p4722533.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
-- www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow"
participants (8)
-
btc＠openinworld.com -
Camillo Bruni -
Igor Stasenko -
kilon alios -
Sean P. DeNigris -
Stephan Eggermont -
Stéphane Ducasse -
Tudor Girba