Smalltalk › Squeak › Squeak - Dev

4.1.1 WTF?

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

18 messages Options

Randal L. Schwartz

4.1.1 WTF?

Why are the files in ftp.squeak.org/trunk/ listed as 4.1.1?
We haven't even had a 4.1.0 release yet!

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<[hidden email]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/ for Smalltalk and Seaside discussion

David T. Lewis

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 07:15:34AM -0700, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>
> Why are the files in ftp.squeak.org/trunk/ listed as 4.1.1?
> We haven't even had a 4.1.0 release yet!

I think Smalltalkers must just have some kind of mental block when
it comes to zero-based indexing:

'4.1.0' asVersion ==> Error: VersionNumbers cannot contain zero or negative numbers

;-)

Dave

Randal L. Schwartz

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

>>>>> "David" == David T Lewis <[hidden email]> writes:

David> I think Smalltalkers must just have some kind of mental block when
David> it comes to zero-based indexing:

David> '4.1.0' asVersion ==> Error: VersionNumbers cannot contain zero
David> or negative numbers

Eww. So that's why the files are misnamed?

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<[hidden email]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/ for Smalltalk and Seaside discussion

Hannes Hirzel

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

As for me I would say it doesn't matter.
Let's focus on the remaining bug fixing issues to get the release out.

And this is having installer packages/preconfigured setups which give
a good out-of-box experience.

Hannes

On 4/17/10, Randal L. Schwartz <[hidden email]> wrote:

>>>>>> "David" == David T Lewis <[hidden email]> writes:
>
> David> I think Smalltalkers must just have some kind of mental block when
> David> it comes to zero-based indexing:
>
> David> '4.1.0' asVersion ==> Error: VersionNumbers cannot contain zero
> David> or negative numbers
>
> Eww. So that's why the files are misnamed?
>
> --
> Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
> <[hidden email]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
> Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
> See http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/ for Smalltalk and Seaside discussion
>
>

Simon Michael

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

As a non-volunteer this carries little weight, but my 2 cents: it does matter, the release should be called 4.1.

David T. Lewis

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

In reply to this post by Randal L. Schwartz

On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 07:45:20AM -0700, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
> >>>>> "David" == David T Lewis <[hidden email]> writes:
>
> David> I think Smalltalkers must just have some kind of mental block when
> David> it comes to zero-based indexing:
>
> David> '4.1.0' asVersion ==> Error: VersionNumbers cannot contain zero
> David> or negative numbers
>
> Eww. So that's why the files are misnamed?

No, no, I was only joking(*). I assume that it was just a mistake and
that the file was accidentally misnamed.

Dave

(*) Although I did find it annoying to discover that I could not convert
my VMMaker versionString into an instance of VersionNumber.

David T. Lewis

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

In reply to this post by Hannes Hirzel

On Sat, Apr 17, 2010 at 02:48:30PM +0000, Hannes Hirzel wrote:

>
> On 4/17/10, Randal L. Schwartz <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >>>>>> "David" == David T Lewis <[hidden email]> writes:
> >
> > David> I think Smalltalkers must just have some kind of mental block when
> > David> it comes to zero-based indexing:
> >
> > David> '4.1.0' asVersion ==> Error: VersionNumbers cannot contain zero
> > David> or negative numbers
> >
> > Eww. So that's why the files are misnamed?
>
> As for me I would say it doesn't matter.
> Let's focus on the remaining bug fixing issues to get the release out.

We're done fixing issues for 4.1, just going though the final steps to
announce it.

> And this is having installer packages/preconfigured setups which give
> a good out-of-box experience.

Yes this is important (but not a reason to delay 4.1 release).

Dave

Stéphane Rollandin

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

> We're done fixing issues for 4.1, just going though the final steps to
> announce it.

In my opinion the broken Crtl-c / Ctrl-v is a show stopper; we should
fix it before the release.

Stef

Randal L. Schwartz

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

>>>>> "Stéphane" == Stéphane Rollandin <[hidden email]> writes:

Stéphane> In my opinion the broken Crtl-c / Ctrl-v is a show stopper; we should fix it
Stéphane> before the release.

So is anyone going to explain what 4.1.1 is? If it's the 4.1 release,
shouldn't it be just 4.1? If it's something later, it should be
explained.

*I* don't know, and I thought I was on top of this.

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<[hidden email]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/ for Smalltalk and Seaside discussion

Hannes Hirzel

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

In reply to this post by Stéphane Rollandin

On 4/17/10, Stéphane Rollandin <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> We're done fixing issues for 4.1, just going though the final steps to
>> announce it.
>
> In my opinion the broken Crtl-c / Ctrl-v is a show stopper; we should
> fix it before the release.
>
> Stef
>

I agree, the preference 'duplicateControlAndAltKeys' does not work,
see screenshot.

Hannes

brokenPreferenceIn4.1.PNG (52K) Download Attachment

Andreas.Raab

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

In reply to this post by Randal L. Schwartz

On 4/17/2010 7:45 AM, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>>>>>> "David" == David T Lewis<[hidden email]> writes:
>
> David> I think Smalltalkers must just have some kind of mental block when
> David> it comes to zero-based indexing:
>
> David> '4.1.0' asVersion ==> Error: VersionNumbers cannot contain zero
> David> or negative numbers
>
> Eww. So that's why the files are misnamed?

Ah, last minute issues :-) The files were named intentionally, under the
assumption that there will be 4.1.2 and 4.1.3 releases. In which case I
find it much preferable to have the *first* version be called 4.1.1 and
the *second* version 4.1.2 and the *third* version 4.1.3 etc.

Seemed pretty obvious to me :-) But before we start a bikeshed
discussion around it, I'd be willing to change that if people really
think it's such a big deal.

Cheers,
- Andreas

Ian Trudel-2

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

2010/4/17 Andreas Raab <[hidden email]>:
> Ah, last minute issues :-) The files were named intentionally, under the
> assumption that there will be 4.1.2 and 4.1.3 releases. In which case I find
> it much preferable to have the *first* version be called 4.1.1 and the
> *second* version 4.1.2 and the *third* version 4.1.3 etc.
>
> Seemed pretty obvious to me :-) But before we start a bikeshed discussion
> around it, I'd be willing to change that if people really think it's such a
> big deal.

It's not so obvious. Software versions typically use 0 as minor or
otherwise not present.

Smalltalk vmVersion returns 'Squeak3.10.2 of 11 February 2010 [latest
update: #9314]'. Is that normal? Squeak4.0.2.exe is the file included
in RC5. Where 4.0.2 comes from? It's bit confusing. :)

Ian.
--
http://mecenia.blogspot.com/

Hannes Hirzel

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

In reply to this post by Andreas.Raab

I agree with Andreas, it's not a big deal. Whatever. My preference
'Let's keep it as it is'.

Hannes

On 4/17/10, Andreas Raab <[hidden email]> wrote:

> On 4/17/2010 7:45 AM, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:
>>>>>>> "David" == David T Lewis<[hidden email]> writes:
>>
>> David> I think Smalltalkers must just have some kind of mental block when
>> David> it comes to zero-based indexing:
>>
>> David> '4.1.0' asVersion ==> Error: VersionNumbers cannot contain zero
>> David> or negative numbers
>>
>> Eww. So that's why the files are misnamed?
>
> Ah, last minute issues :-) The files were named intentionally, under the
> assumption that there will be 4.1.2 and 4.1.3 releases. In which case I
> find it much preferable to have the *first* version be called 4.1.1 and
> the *second* version 4.1.2 and the *third* version 4.1.3 etc.
>
> Seemed pretty obvious to me :-) But before we start a bikeshed
> discussion around it, I'd be willing to change that if people really
> think it's such a big deal.
>
> Cheers,
> - Andreas
>
>

Randal L. Schwartz

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

In reply to this post by Ian Trudel-2

>>>>> "Ian" == Ian Trudel <[hidden email]> writes:

>> Seemed pretty obvious to me :-) But before we start a bikeshed discussion
>> around it, I'd be willing to change that if people really think it's such a
>> big deal.

Ian> It's not so obvious. Software versions typically use 0 as minor or
Ian> otherwise not present.

4.0 was 4.0, right? Not 4.0.1?

I think for that reason, 4.1 should be 4.1.

If we have another feature release, it'll be 4.2.

If we have to go back to do maintainence on 4.1, it'll be 4.1.1.

This is a longstanding tradition of Squeak releases.

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<[hidden email]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/ for Smalltalk and Seaside discussion

Hannes Hirzel

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

OK, so let' Andreas please rename the thing and let's start working on
4.1.1 to fix this cut and paste shortcut key problem (In MSWindows,
see other thread).

Hannes

On 4/17/10, Randal L. Schwartz <[hidden email]> wrote:

>>>>>> "Ian" == Ian Trudel <[hidden email]> writes:
>
>>> Seemed pretty obvious to me :-) But before we start a bikeshed discussion
>>> around it, I'd be willing to change that if people really think it's such
>>> a
>>> big deal.
>
> Ian> It's not so obvious. Software versions typically use 0 as minor or
> Ian> otherwise not present.
>
> 4.0 was 4.0, right? Not 4.0.1?
>
> I think for that reason, 4.1 should be 4.1.
>
> If we have another feature release, it'll be 4.2.
>
> If we have to go back to do maintainence on 4.1, it'll be 4.1.1.
>
> This is a longstanding tradition of Squeak releases.
>
> --
> Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
> <[hidden email]> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
> Smalltalk/Perl/Unix consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
> See http://methodsandmessages.vox.com/ for Smalltalk and Seaside discussion
>
>

bpi

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

In reply to this post by Randal L. Schwartz

Am 17.04.2010 um 20:06 schrieb Randal L. Schwartz:
> 4.0 was 4.0, right? Not 4.0.1?
>
> I think for that reason, 4.1 should be 4.1.
>
> If we have another feature release, it'll be 4.2.
>
> If we have to go back to do maintainence on 4.1, it'll be 4.1.1.
>
> This is a longstanding tradition of Squeak releases.
+1

Cheers,
Bernhard

Andreas.Raab

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

In reply to this post by Randal L. Schwartz

On 4/17/2010 11:06 AM, Randal L. Schwartz wrote:

Fine. I really don't care. I'll make another build including the fixes
that came along earlier (Ctrl+Alt dup, the terse guide welcome
workspace, MixedSound concatenation).

Cheers,
- Andreas

K. K. Subramaniam

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

In reply to this post by David T. Lewis

On Saturday 17 April 2010 08:12:13 pm David T. Lewis wrote:
> '4.1.0' asVersion ==> Error: VersionNumbers cannot contain zero or negative
> numbers
Why not fix it in VersionNumber>>initializeNumbers:

aCollection do: [ :ea |

- ea <= 0 ifTrue:
+ ea < 0 ifTrue:

[^self error: 'VersionNumbers cannot negative numbers']].

Subbu