4.1.1 WTF?

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
18 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

4.1.1 WTF?

Randal L. Schwartz

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

David T. Lewis
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


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

Randal L. Schwartz
>>>>> "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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

Hannes Hirzel
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
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

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


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

David T. Lewis
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.


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

David T. Lewis
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


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

Stéphane Rollandin
> 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



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

Randal L. Schwartz
>>>>> "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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

Hannes Hirzel
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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

Andreas.Raab
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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

Ian Trudel-2
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/

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

Hannes Hirzel
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
>
>

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

Randal L. Schwartz
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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

Hannes Hirzel
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
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

bpi
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


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

Andreas.Raab
In reply to this post by Randal L. Schwartz
On 4/17/2010 11:06 AM, Randal L. Schwartz 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.

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

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: 4.1.1 WTF?

K. K. Subramaniam
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