About not using full Pharo
Locked
 
|
Hi,
I've read that some of you are installing their own set of packages on top of Pharo-Core and not using Pharo. Why is that so? What don't you like in Pharo? Why didn't you tell us before? If we don't have this information, you might not like the new Pharo-Core and you will have nothing anymore to base your images on. Speak now or forever hold your peace :-) -- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st "Lambdas are relegated to relative obscurity until Java makes them popular by not having them." James Iry |
Re: About not using full Pharo
|
|
Hi Damien. That peolpe are NOT using PharoDev is something really good from my point of view because:
1) it means that we have a set of external packages that can be loaded and work in a PharoCore 2) it is easy to manage them (otherwise they wouldn't do it) I think there are important "new" reasons why people can *now* build they own images: a) Metacello existance b) There are configurations for almost all needed projects/packages c) Jenkis d) New and easy Settings browser With all of the them is it TRIVIAL to automatically build your own PharoDev image, where you put what you want, you set the settings to want, etc. But for all the rest of the people, you have PharoDev :) Cheers On Sun, Jun 19, 2011 at 10:38 PM, Damien Cassou <[hidden email]> wrote: Hi, -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com |
|
|
In reply to this post by Damien Cassou
On 19/06/11 4:38 PM, Damien Cassou wrote:
> Hi, > > I've read that some of you are installing their own set of packages on > top of Pharo-Core and not using Pharo. Why is that so? What don't you > like in Pharo? Why didn't you tell us before? My image was always built from PharoCore. It was done this way before PharoDev existed, and I saw no reason to change. I thought people were supposed to build their own image (tailored to their needs). IIRC, PharoDev was initially provided as a convenience for those that wanted such an artifact. The concept of PharoDev evolved - I recall discussion about the "branding" of PharoDev as Pharo, and relegating PharoCore to the role of build process artifact. The discussion did not raise any flags for me, until now, when the discussion has turned to "eliminating" PharoCore. I've never mentioned this before because I never thought I was doing anything wrong by building my own image from PharoCore. |
|
|
In reply to this post by Damien Cassou
> I've read that some of you are installing their own set of packages on
> top of Pharo-Core and not using Pharo. Why is that so? What don't you > like in Pharo? Why didn't you tell us before? Uhh? Don't tell me you didn't know? All images I build on my Jenkins are based on PharoCore since we setup that infrastructure. I even unload packages from PharoCore, because I think it contains far to much cruft (https://github.com/renggli/builder/blob/master/scripts/pharo-cleanup.st). This is also something I repeatedly brought up. I don't use Pharo mostly because of OCompletion. It looks ugly and I get annoyed to have it constantly suggesting me stuff I didn't ask for. No other IDE I know has such an aggressive and annoying completion behavior. Also the Pharo images usually contain very old code, for example the image I just downloaded from pharo-project.org uses a version of OmniBrowser with the broken scrollbar. Something that I fixed in the beginning of this year, I think. Personally I don't need many of the packages loaded into Pharo: AutmaticMethodCategorizer (something similar is in OB-Standard for a long time), Autotest (something similar is in OB-SUnitIntegration for a long time), HelpSystem, MemoryMonitor, MorphicExtras, Sound, ArchiveViewer, SqueakCompatiblity, BitBltPen, MovieMorph, ObjectMetaTools, Nile, ProfStef, ScriptManager, XMLSupport (I load that only when needed), XMLWriter. > If we don't have this information, you might not like the new > Pharo-Core and you will have nothing anymore to base your images on. > Speak now or forever hold your peace :-) Since the beginning of 2011, 3757 of my images were downloaded from people other than me. Not sure who this is, why they do it, and if this number is any significant? Maybe it helps you for your statistics? Cheers, Lukas -- Lukas Renggli www.lukas-renggli.ch |
|
|
In reply to this post by Yanni Chiu
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 6:20 AM, Yanni Chiu <[hidden email]> wrote:
> My image was always built from PharoCore. It was done this way before > PharoDev existed, and I saw no reason to change. > > I thought people were supposed to build their own image (tailored to their > needs). IIRC, PharoDev was initially provided as a convenience for those > that wanted such an artifact. > > The concept of PharoDev evolved - I recall discussion about the "branding" > of PharoDev as Pharo, and relegating PharoCore to the role of build process > artifact. The discussion did not raise any flags for me, until now, when the > discussion has turned to "eliminating" PharoCore. > > I've never mentioned this before because I never thought I was doing > anything wrong by building my own image from PharoCore. You didn't do anything wrong :-). As Mariano pointed out, the process became so simple that everyone can now build his own images. I was asking because if a lot of you don't like one package or always add the same packages, we should know it to improve Pharo so that it suits most people. -- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st "Lambdas are relegated to relative obscurity until Java makes them popular by not having them." James Iry |
|
|
In reply to this post by Lukas Renggli
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 6:56 AM, Lukas Renggli <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> I've read that some of you are installing their own set of packages on >> top of Pharo-Core and not using Pharo. Why is that so? What don't you >> like in Pharo? Why didn't you tell us before? > > Uhh? Don't tell me you didn't know? All images I build on my Jenkins > are based on PharoCore since we setup that infrastructure. You are right, I knew about you :-) > Since the beginning of 2011, 3757 of my images were downloaded from > people other than me. Not sure who this is, why they do it, and if > this number is any significant? Maybe it helps you for your > statistics? I often use your images to get the latest Pier and Seaside. -- Damien Cassou http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st "Lambdas are relegated to relative obscurity until Java makes them popular by not having them." James Iry |
Re: About not using full Pharo
|
I'm a One-Click user!
I use most of the tools included by default (finder, OB, autocompletion, etc), plus I add a couple more to my images (newInspector, multipleWorlds, etc). Cheers!
2011/6/20 Damien Cassou <[hidden email]>
|
Re: About not using full Pharo
|
|
Personally I'm tired of loading the tools / frameworks I use in Pharo. I would like to take time to setup my own Hudson. I think it's normal that a lot of people needs its own "One Click" with latest pharo/vm/tools they use, just because we can do it.
Would be cool to have an open CI platform so people can register their own config. Laurent Laffont - @lolgzs Pharo Smalltalk Screencasts: http://www.pharocasts.com/ Blog: http://magaloma.blogspot.com/
Developer group: http://cara74.seasidehosting.st
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Bernat Romagosa <[hidden email]> wrote: I'm a One-Click user! |
Re: About not using full Pharo
|
|
In reply to this post by Yanni Chiu
On Jun 20, 2011, at 6:20 AM, Yanni Chiu wrote: > On 19/06/11 4:38 PM, Damien Cassou wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I've read that some of you are installing their own set of packages on >> top of Pharo-Core and not using Pharo. Why is that so? What don't you >> like in Pharo? Why didn't you tell us before? > > My image was always built from PharoCore. It was done this way before PharoDev existed, and I saw no reason to change. > > I thought people were supposed to build their own image (tailored to their needs). IIRC, PharoDev was initially provided as a convenience for those that wanted such an artifact. > > The concept of PharoDev evolved - I recall discussion about the "branding" of PharoDev as Pharo, and relegating PharoCore to the role of build process artifact. The discussion did not raise any flags for me, until now, when the discussion has turned to "eliminating" PharoCore. > > I've never mentioned this before because I never thought I was doing anything wrong by building my own image from PharoCore. but you are not. :) The point is that we should be able to have good tools inside the default system so that we can get faster. We are fedup to do refactoring of core manually. Stef |
Re: About not using full Pharo
|
|
In reply to this post by laurent laffont
Yes we would like to offer that service.
Everybody building their onw image via jenkins :) Stef On Jun 20, 2011, at 11:25 AM, laurent laffont wrote: > Personally I'm tired of loading the tools / frameworks I use in Pharo. > > I would like to take time to setup my own Hudson. > > I think it's normal that a lot of people needs its own "One Click" with latest pharo/vm/tools they use, just because we can do it. > > Would be cool to have an open CI platform so people can register their own config. > > > Laurent Laffont - @lolgzs > > Pharo Smalltalk Screencasts: http://www.pharocasts.com/ > Blog: http://magaloma.blogspot.com/ > Developer group: http://cara74.seasidehosting.st > > > > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Bernat Romagosa <[hidden email]> wrote: > I'm a One-Click user! > > I use most of the tools included by default (finder, OB, autocompletion, etc), plus I add a couple more to my images (newInspector, multipleWorlds, etc). > > Cheers! > > 2011/6/20 Damien Cassou <[hidden email]> > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 6:56 AM, Lukas Renggli <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> I've read that some of you are installing their own set of packages on > >> top of Pharo-Core and not using Pharo. Why is that so? What don't you > >> like in Pharo? Why didn't you tell us before? > > > > Uhh? Don't tell me you didn't know? All images I build on my Jenkins > > are based on PharoCore since we setup that infrastructure. > > > You are right, I knew about you :-) > > > > Since the beginning of 2011, 3757 of my images were downloaded from > > people other than me. Not sure who this is, why they do it, and if > > this number is any significant? Maybe it helps you for your > > statistics? > > I often use your images to get the latest Pier and Seaside. > > -- > Damien Cassou > http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st > > "Lambdas are relegated to relative obscurity until Java makes them > popular by not having them." James Iry > > > |
Re: About not using full Pharo
|
|
Yes, that would be awesome and have lot of cool features. Nevertheless, nobody prevent you from doing a poor man jenkis: a simple bash script that downloaded latest pharo image, uncompress, and send a build.st script. In buid.st you put a Gofer script to load all your stuff and finally set preference.
So....every in a while you do ./buildMyCoolImage.sh and that's all. Cheers On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: Yes we would like to offer that service. -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com |
Re: About not using full Pharo
|
|
Why a .sh ? Pharo is here ;)
Laurent
On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck <[hidden email]> wrote: Yes, that would be awesome and have lot of cool features. Nevertheless, nobody prevent you from doing a poor man jenkis: a simple bash script that downloaded latest pharo image, uncompress, and send a build.st script. In buid.st you put a Gofer script to load all your stuff and finally set preference. |
|
|
In reply to this post by Bernat Romagosa
I'm also a one-click user and I'd like to have out-of-the box most of
things for a daily use. In a Pharo named simply Pharo. No Pharo-dev, which already sound scary .. :) If I need more, I'd like to go to something like MetacelloBrowser, search around then one-click load it. And unload if not happy. Current Monticello/SqueakSource combo is way too complex even for me! Best regards Janko S, Bernat Romagosa piše: > I'm a One-Click user! > > I use most of the tools included by default (finder, OB, autocompletion, > etc), plus I add a couple more to my images (newInspector, > multipleWorlds, etc). > > Cheers! > > 2011/6/20 Damien Cassou <[hidden email] > <mailto:[hidden email]>> > > On Mon, Jun 20, 2011 at 6:56 AM, Lukas Renggli <[hidden email] > <mailto:[hidden email]>> wrote: > >> I've read that some of you are installing their own set of > packages on > >> top of Pharo-Core and not using Pharo. Why is that so? What don't you > >> like in Pharo? Why didn't you tell us before? > > > > Uhh? Don't tell me you didn't know? All images I build on my Jenkins > > are based on PharoCore since we setup that infrastructure. > > > You are right, I knew about you :-) > > > > Since the beginning of 2011, 3757 of my images were downloaded from > > people other than me. Not sure who this is, why they do it, and if > > this number is any significant? Maybe it helps you for your > > statistics? > > I often use your images to get the latest Pier and Seaside. > > -- > Damien Cassou > http://damiencassou.seasidehosting.st > > "Lambdas are relegated to relative obscurity until Java makes them > popular by not having them." James Iry > > -- Janko Mivšek Svetovalec za informatiko Eranova d.o.o. Ljubljana, Slovenija www.eranova.si tel: 01 514 22 55 faks: 01 514 22 56 gsm: 031 674 565 |
|
|
In reply to this post by Stéphane Ducasse
> The point is that we should be able to have good tools inside the default system so that we can get faster.
> We are fedup to do refactoring of core manually. You have a build server that builds PharoCore and Pharo images immediately and all the time. So, why are you not improving the system in Pharo and immediately let your servers build experimental PharoCore and Pharo images right after you commit? If tests pass the files get propagated and generate the official builds. As long as Pharo packages are clean without any overrides there should be no problem (this is the case with my builds). If you remember, we did together some refactorings while I was visiting you in Lille last year. Lukas -- Lukas Renggli www.lukas-renggli.ch |
Re: About not using full Pharo
|
|
>> The point is that we should be able to have good tools inside the default system so that we can get faster.
>> We are fedup to do refactoring of core manually. > > You have a build server that builds PharoCore and Pharo images > immediately and all the time. So, why are you not improving the system > in Pharo and immediately let your servers build experimental PharoCore > and Pharo images right after you commit? If tests pass the files get > propagated and generate the official builds. The point is that when I work with core right now we do not have RB loaded. So a pain ;) Now if we work on Pharo (RB loaded) and change RB (we will have to do that for RPackage for example). How do I publish, reload everything? I want to close the loop because it should be possible and that jenkins does all the job for me. Right now scriptLoader does not deal with external packages and dependencies So we could do it but we will lose all the effort in making these external packages loadable outside of the "pharo" image. So this is why I proposed. > seed + MetacelloSpec + modification => seed' + MetacelloSpec' > > and that we are able to build hudson that takes > aSeed + a spec > => run all the tests + run all the quality check > > Right now we have > seed + list of package + modification => seed' + list of package' > > and we get in trouble when we modify seed parts that influence external package This way: pharo hardcore like us can work with the tools at full speed. And other people can make sure that they can load the tools we use and modified in the different version of the images using Metacello and the dependencies management (the scary part of packages for me). > As long as Pharo packages are clean without any overrides there should > be no problem (this is the case with my builds). Yes more or less because dependencies between versions will be evil and kill us if we do not pay attention. > If you remember, we did together some refactorings while I was visiting you in Lille last year. Yes but I got stuck :( I should invest throwing away scriptLoader :) Mariano, Guillermo I would love to have a Metacello conf for Pharo (old pharo-core). And that the system generate it for me. Ok I will invest in that.... Argh. Now I spent 1/3 of my time in meetings (as lab representent reagrh....). Stef (I will survive). > > Lukas > > -- > Lukas Renggli > www.lukas-renggli.ch > |
Re: About not using full Pharo
|
|
In reply to this post by Damien Cassou
Le 19/06/2011 22:38, Damien Cassou a écrit :
> Hi, > > I've read that some of you are installing their own set of packages on > top of Pharo-Core and not using Pharo. Why is that so? What don't you > like in Pharo? Why didn't you tell us before? I switch to Pharo core because I use a different version of XML package (an older one). Not a really good reason, but I found easier to take core and install the package I need with a script. Hilaire |
«
Return to Pharo Smalltalk Developers
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |