Andreas projects on SS

Hey!

On 02/13/2014 06:38 PM, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
Which of course was one of the options I was asking about originally! :)

> Sorry about losing your edits, they must have gotten lost when
> squeaksource moved from Berne to our server. Can you add them again?
> They should be safe now.

Yes I can do that again - and with the idea from Ben to put a snapshot
up that says "MovedToSmalltalkhub" then people should not be able to
miss that it is not a complete nor active repo. Because *only* a note is
not enough when people access it from Monticello, and... well, ok, I
still feel uncomfortable leaving stale repositories around - but I can
live with that.

(and I wonder how they "got lost")

Ok, so Ron will get admin access to Andreas' projects - great, then we
can make sure that we can update them with fixes and make it clear when
one (WebClient) or more of them has actually been moved.

Finally, yes, deleting is "evil" but stale data is even worse IMHO.

Still the idea of forbidding people to remove their own projects, I
really hope that was not something you seriously consider?

regards, Göran

Hey!

On 02/13/2014 09:17 PM, Chris Muller wrote:
> Göran, I could never feel hostility toward you.

:) I kinda got the feeling I was talked to like some "renegade to those
awful Pharooners" ;)

Thanks

> What I do/did feel
> about deleting projects is some "urgency" to speak before you pushed
> the delete button.

I think you may have misunderstood me a bit (sloppy writing of me), see
below.

> If you are the _sole_ admin (and sole developer), sure, the decision
> is yours, but the subject if this thread is about _Andreas'_ projects
> and what to do.

Well, we talked about both situations, but sure.

> You suggested 1) gain access, 2) copy to new repo, 3)
> delete old repo.  If we are talking about Andreas' projects, then I'm
> strongly opposed to 3.  If we weren't, then I apologize for my
> misunderstanding.

The delete part was sloppy written - I never meant to *just* delete
something! I meant, copy somewhere else and delete. In other words - move.

I am asking these questions from pure practical reasons. I have fixes I
want to get properly integrated wherever they need to be. I don't want
to mess with old repos that aren't maintained - I want to know the
*primary* repo for a given Project, like SqueakSSL for example.

> I'm also opposed to (1) only to the extent it mutates any objects
> Andreas made.  If we could get by with ONLY adding new versions to a
> project, then that'd only be extending Andreas' original work without
> modifying it, probably fine.  Otherwise, I think we should extend it
> in a new project of our own, and add or update appropriate entries in
> the catalog.

Interesting notion. I guess that is also a route, mark all Andreas
projects as "These are not maintained but kept readonly as they were
when Andreas left us to respect him. For maintained derivatives see xxxx."

Sure, that works too. BUT... do note that many people find stuff by
googling and this is a bit of an issue:

- If people end up on the actual versions HTML pages, then they don't
get any warning that they are looking at a stale repo.

- If people google and find a repo doit, and enter that into Monticello,
they also never see the note.

Of course, the "hack" to add a snapshot mentioning that it is not a
maintained repo - that actually works fairly well.

I agree, it is a hopeless war :) :) - but I still am free to do my best
to avoid confusion on my own stuff. I really hope you are not seriously
considering forbidding deleting projects.

regards, Göran

>> You suggested 1) gain access, 2) copy to new repo, 3)
>> delete old repo.  If we are talking about Andreas' projects, then I'm
>> strongly opposed to 3.  If we weren't, then I apologize for my
>> misunderstanding.
>
> The delete part was sloppy written - I never meant to *just* delete
> something! I meant, copy somewhere else and delete. In other words - move.

I knew that, and I am totally opposed to moving.  Please only copy it.

I think we should not scatter lame catalog information about in our
source-code repository at all.

Even worse would be to break into spaces we do not have access to and
molest them with lame catalog information.

I said we should make a *new* project, of our *own*.  And let the new
Pharo catalog, Squeak catalog and search-engines direct people to the
new project.

> Sure, that works too. BUT... do note that many people find stuff by googling
> and this is a bit of an issue:
>
> - If people end up on the actual versions HTML pages, then they don't get
> any warning that they are looking at a stale repo.
>
> - If people google and find a repo doit, and enter that into Monticello,
> they also never see the note.

Good!  Because then they'll come complaining on the list and someone
can refer them to the new Pharo catalog or Squeak catalog and their
productivity will be enhanced forever going forward.

Look, Google finds old stuff and new stuff, related stuff and
unrelated stuff, such as some newly sprouted fork project with the
same name but maybe at a different repository.  So we should embrace,
not fight, this organic nature of software-dev community.

Well, for the purposes for which you want to delete your projects (to
meet a cataloging requirement) makes me want to seriously consider it.
 "Ongoing-maintenance" is not the only need being served by the
repository.  Once something is put out there and people become
dependent on it, even if you own it, careful consideration should be
given about suddenly and arbitrarily deleting it.  At least something
like what the original SqueakSource folks did when they gave plenty of
notice about sunsetting squeaksource.com instead of simply killing the
server one day with no notice.

That way, people still dependent on it can do the necessary archiving
on their own.  In SS's case, others stepped up to take it over and the
great thing was preserved as, in my view, an _archive_.  Deleting from
archive is like deleting a book from a library because a new edition
of it just came out on amazon.

Hey!

On 02/13/2014 11:05 PM, Chris Muller wrote:
>>> You suggested 1) gain access, 2) copy to new repo, 3)
>>> delete old repo.  If we are talking about Andreas' projects, then I'm
>>> strongly opposed to 3.  If we weren't, then I apologize for my
>>> misunderstanding.
>>
>> The delete part was sloppy written - I never meant to *just* delete
>> something! I meant, copy somewhere else and delete. In other words - move.
>
> I knew that, and I am totally opposed to moving.  Please only copy it.

And:

[SNIP]
>> Interesting notion. I guess that is also a route, mark all Andreas projects
>> as "These are not maintained but kept readonly as they were when Andreas
>> left us to respect him. For maintained derivatives see xxxx."
>
> I think we should not scatter lame catalog information about in our
> source-code repository at all.
>
> Even worse would be to break into spaces we do not have access to and
> molest them with lame catalog information.

Molest? Lame? Ok, your language is a bit rough - but I gather you don't
want us to do ANYTHING at all with Andreas projects then?

> I said we should make a *new* project, of our *own*.  And let the new
> Pharo catalog, Squeak catalog and search-engines direct people to the
> new project.

Well, problem is that SS is *also* a *catalog*. You can search in it and
browse in it and google can index parts of it, and google is also a catalog.

Hmmm, I just noticed that you can indeed not reach versions without
getting the Note in your face, great! That makes it much better for my
own warning notes at least, good.

>> Sure, that works too. BUT... do note that many people find stuff by googling
>> and this is a bit of an issue:
>>
>> - If people end up on the actual versions HTML pages, then they don't get
>> any warning that they are looking at a stale repo.

That was wrong, it seems to show the Note there.

>> - If people google and find a repo doit, and enter that into Monticello,
>> they also never see the note.
>
> Good!  Because then they'll come complaining on the list and someone
> can refer them to the new Pharo catalog or Squeak catalog and their
> productivity will be enhanced forever going forward.

Or, they may just think "Oh well, this WebClient thing does not work,
its just old." and simply move on. Not realizing that it is indeed
maintained, but hosted under S3.

[SNIP]
 >> I really hope you are not seriously
>> considering forbidding deleting projects.
>
> Well, for the purposes for which you want to delete your projects (to
> meet a cataloging requirement) makes me want to seriously consider it.

Its not a "cataloging requirement", its the fact that I just want to
host my code in a single place (as far as I can). Now, I have always
viewed SS as a hosting *service*.

You telling me that you may decide to forbid me from administrating my
own projects thus taking them from me - makes me want to just go there
RIGHT NOW and delete all my projects and beating you to it.

And yeah, I am seriously considering it too.

It is *not* an archive, it is still 90% mostly functioning. I can't
create new projects, not sure why though.

> Deleting from
> archive is like deleting a book from a library because a new edition
> of it just came out on amazon.

Analogy doesn't work.

regards, Göran

Hi Göran,

On Thu, 13 Feb 2014, Göran Krampe wrote:
It seemed like you were not aware of the recent updates on
squeaksource.com.

>
>> update your projects there, then add a pointer to the new repository.
>
> Which is exactly what I did. And that pointer *disappeared*, which is what I
> described, I think you mistook "my notes" with something else.

Yes, I thought you were the one who wrote the notes on the main page. In
that case it's clearly data loss. When did you add those notes?
Because SqueakMap entries, or Metacello configurations can still point to
versions in those repositories. Deleting the projects would break them.
Since squeaksource.com is stable again, I think it would be the best to
readd those notes.

>
>> The following messages describe why your notes were removed:
>> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013-November/174578.html
>> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2013-December/174950.html
>
> I have no idea what you mean - those posts talk about some generic info that
> someone else put there, right? I am talking about my *own* descriptions on my
> *own* projects.

It's a misunderstanding on my part. Sorry about that.


Levente

>
> regards, Göran
>
>

Sheesh, what’s with all the deliberate taking of offence around here this week? Is it something in the water? Play nice or I’ll have to send you all to the Naughty Step for a cool down.

tim
--
tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
Compromise, says Prof. Trefusis, is stalling between two fools

Hi G?ran,

On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 11:53:33PM +0100, G?ran Krampe wrote:
>
> You telling me that you may decide to forbid me from administrating my
> own projects thus taking them from me - makes me want to just go there
> RIGHT NOW and delete all my projects and beating you to it.

Your projects belong to you, and nobody but you can decide how to manage
them. Period.

<OT>
For my part, I volunteered to move squeaksource.com with the understanding
that I was moving it to a safer home, not copying it to a read-only snapshot.
If we had wanted a read-only snapshot, I would have done nothing at all,
because the previous custodians of squeakmap.com had already committed to
provide that.

Moving squeaksource.com to its new home took a good deal of time and effort
from me and a number of other folks (including Chris) who pitched in to help.
It was more work than I had anticipated but I think we can all be pleased
with the outcome.
</OT>

>
> And yeah, I am seriously considering it too.
>

No need for that, just handle it as you originally intended. Move your
project work to whatever repository you prefer to use, and update the
project description for the previous squeaksource.com repository as you
see fit.

You mentioned earlier that some of your project updates had been lost.
Very possibly this was during the earlier period when squeaksource.com
was losing data after every image restart. I don't think we have any way
to recover lost data from that time period, but if you are able to re-enter
the information, I am confident that it will not get lost again.

Dave

Hi!

On 02/14/2014 12:16 AM, Nicolas Cellier wrote:
[SNIP]
>     Or, they may just think "Oh well, this WebClient thing does not
>     work, its just old." and simply move on. Not realizing that it is
>     indeed maintained, but hosted under S3.
>
>
> Göran,
> I suggested to commit each package empty with a clear comment indicating
> where further dev. takes place.
> Wouldn't it solve the problem?

Yeah, I would say it solves it for me because I can't come up with any
other way of accessing the Project repo where you would actually *miss*
my note (since the URL entry for versions actually shows the note - I
was under the wrong impression it did not).

So yes, this is what I now have done for all of my personal projects -
thus hopefully making sure that people notice that the current repo is
on StHub.

I am not the hostile one - Chris was talking about forbidding deletion
of Projects. I was under the impression (as David Lewis also seems to
be) that my account is my account and under my full control.

I don't want stuff on the Internet under *my name* that someone else
controls - to me its obvious.

> As a user, if I have a solution that happens to work, why should I urge
> to switch to ss3 or stHub?

I don't understand the question. Are you asking me why *you* should
think of switching to something else than SS?

> Ah if all people working for IT would adopt the same behavior, then we
> would constantly have to buy new hardware, with new software, downloaded
> from new repository and with new bugs. Oops, I just discovered a
> business model ;)

Again, I am not following. Its simple really, *I* (=me) want *one* place
to maintain my personal Monticello based projects. SS has a truly sucky
track record. Reassurances that "its all fine now" doesn't ring true
because I can still not create new Projects. Further, SS itself is not
moving forward AFAIK.

StHub is IMHO better in many different ways although I am slightly
annoyed with it being down sometimes, but AFAIK it has never lost data.

So I am moving my primary repos there, what's the problem?

I am not saying everyone should move.

regards, Göran

Hey Levente!

(and oh, thanks for that mem leak fix in SqueakSSL)

On 02/14/2014 12:21 AM, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
> On Thu, 13 Feb 2014, Göran Krampe wrote:
>> On 02/13/2014 04:50 PM, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
>>> Not all projects are dead on squeaksource.com. If you don't plan to
>>
>> I didn't say they were. *Mine* are though since I copied them to StHub.
>
> It seemed like you were not aware of the recent updates on
> squeaksource.com.

You mean updates of the front page? I was never talking about the front
page nor have I ever edited it.

>>> update your projects there, then add a pointer to the new repository.
>>
>> Which is exactly what I did. And that pointer *disappeared*, which is
>> what I described, I think you mistook "my notes" with something else.
>
> Yes, I thought you were the one who wrote the notes on the main page. In
> that case it's clearly data loss. When did you add those notes?

I think I did it at multiple occasions - once was 2012-01-06. They all
were gone now but I can not tell you when they disappeared nor how many
users have been fooled during that unknown timespan.

I have now added those notes back.

Which is what I did.

I know deleting would break the URLs (although one could imagine the
actual *file URLs* to keep working thus breaking nothing), but I HATE
HATE HATE stale repositories! To me stale is worse than 404.

I never want any user of *my stuff* to come to me saying:

"You know I have been spending 132 hours fixing all these bugs in your
project X - would you like to integrate that?"

...and hearing myself replying:

"OOohhh, sorry, I fixed those bugs a long time ago, what repo are you
using btw?"


Thus either I make sure it can not happen with abundance of notes all
over my SS account - or I delete it.

>> I have no idea what you mean - those posts talk about some generic
>> info that someone else put there, right? I am talking about my *own*
>> descriptions on my *own* projects.
>
> It's a misunderstanding on my part. Sorry about that.

No problemo.

regards, Göran

Hi David!

On 02/14/2014 02:19 AM, David T. Lewis wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 13, 2014 at 11:53:33PM +0100, G?ran Krampe wrote:
>> You telling me that you may decide to forbid me from administrating my
>> own projects thus taking them from me - makes me want to just go there
>> RIGHT NOW and delete all my projects and beating you to it.
>
> Your projects belong to you, and nobody but you can decide how to manage
> them. Period.

Good.

> <OT>
> For my part, I volunteered to move squeaksource.com with the understanding
> that I was moving it to a safer home, not copying it to a read-only snapshot.
> If we had wanted a read-only snapshot, I would have done nothing at all,
> because the previous custodians of squeakmap.com had already committed to
> provide that.

I think you meant squeaksource.com. Yes. Thus it is NOT an archive, can
we agree on that?

This is actually the crux I think of us disagreeing on many aspects.

> Moving squeaksource.com to its new home took a good deal of time and effort
> from me and a number of other folks (including Chris) who pitched in to help.
> It was more work than I had anticipated but I think we can all be pleased
> with the outcome.

I am super happy you did it.

>> And yeah, I am seriously considering it too.
>>
>
> No need for that, just handle it as you originally intended. Move your
> project work to whatever repository you prefer to use, and update the
> project description for the previous squeaksource.com repository as you
> see fit.

I have done this and AFAICT I don't think anyone can accidentally think
its the current repo for those projects. Can anyone see any way that I
may have missed?

> You mentioned earlier that some of your project updates had been lost.
> Very possibly this was during the earlier period when squeaksource.com
> was losing data after every image restart. I don't think we have any way
> to recover lost data from that time period, but if you are able to re-enter
> the information, I am confident that it will not get lost again.

I reentered, it was no big deal.

Since I haven't followed this - did you move to Magma or? Is that why
things are not going to get lost from now on?

regards, Göran

On 14.02.2014, at 09:18, Göran Krampe <[hidden email]> wrote:
Me too.

Squeaksource.com is a service for providing personal (or shared) repositories. If the owner decides to remove it, it should be her choice alone. Taking over the server does not change that. This is unlike source.squeak.org which is for "official" projects, where we can dictate the rules (and one of them is never to delete old versions).

I seem to hear that people event want to create new projects there. With its new home, that is an option we did not have a year ago. I'm not sure yet whether this is a good idea or not: Let's discuss.

- Bert -

On 14 February 2014 10:46, Bert Freudenberg <[hidden email]> wrote:
The only real downside I can see is increased load on the same box as
CI. We don't bear the cost (CPU or money wise) of projects hosted on
SS3.

Also, SS3 has had a lot of work done on it, and the codebase is a huge
improvement (at least from a user's perspective) over SS.

But I freely confess my conflict of interest: every cycle that goes
towards hosting projects on squeaksource.com takes cycles away from
build.squeak.org.

frank

On 14.02.2014, at 12:36, Frank Shearar <[hidden email]> wrote:

I personally would like to see migrate the Squeaksource.com instance to
the squeaksource3 codebase (not ss3.gemtalksystem.com), preferably on
a  physically different machine than build.squeak.org or source.squeak.org
for that matter.

just my 2ct

Best
        -Tobias

Hey Bert!

Congratulations btw :)

On 02/14/2014 11:46 AM, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
Good.

> I seem to hear that people event want to create new projects there.
> With its new home, that is an option we did not have a year ago. I'm
> not sure yet whether this is a good idea or not: Let's discuss.

Just a few random thoughts around that:

I am not sure why SS (or StHub for that matter) serves out the actual
file repos. A very simple tweak for availability would be to just add
Nginx (or whatever) to the mix for the actual serving of mczs. Further,
a very easy way of setting up writeable repos on Linux is to use an Ftpd
server, no need to mess with HTTP writes which can be a bit of a pain to
set up.

Comparing SS with StHub I think both have features the other one lacks.
So at this moment they both have plus/minus. BUT... StHub has a much
more modern and scalable architecture, and I also think it has more
development momentum behind it.

Of course, StHub runs in Pharo. So hacking on it might not be of
interest to many Squeakers. I think that would be a mistake though:

StHub is for *Smalltalk*. It would be really great if Squeak/Pharo and
GemStone folks and anyone that can handle MCs could cooperate around
StHub and improve it to fully replace SS and become a fully shared place
for us all.

But I guess balkanization will win yet again.

regards, Göran

On 14 February 2014 12:07, gettimothy <[hidden email]> wrote:
Fair point, but you can't just create a project on source.squeak.org,
firstly. So secondly if you _could_, you'd hopefully know that
source.squeak.org only hosted projects "owned" by the Squeak
community. I'd guess that implies MIT licence, and copyright residing
in the collective authors of commits to those projects. (But IANAL.)

frank

> cheers.
>
> tty
>
>
>

On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 11:46:15AM +0100, Bert Freudenberg wrote:
> On 14.02.2014, at 09:18, G?ran Krampe <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Squeaksource.com is a service for providing personal (or shared) repositories. If the owner decides to remove it, it should be her choice alone. Taking over the server does not change that. This is unlike source.squeak.org which is for "official" projects, where we can dictate the rules (and one of them is never to delete old versions).
>
> I seem to hear that people event want to create new projects there. With its new home, that is an option we did not have a year ago. I'm not sure yet whether this is a good idea or not: Let's discuss.
>

My feeling is that we should strongly encourage new projects to be opened on the
newer repository services, but we should not strictly prohibit it.

The SS3 and StHub projects are actively developed and supported by people who
want to host new projects. We should support their efforts and be happy that
they are willing to do the work, both in developing the services and in providing
them to the community.

On the other hand, it would be nice to be able to open new project on squeaksource.com
once in a while. As an example, I was recently thinking of updating my old DirectoryPlugin
from 10 years ago and putting it into Monticello. I do not really want to put it into
an existing project such as OSProcessPlugin because it is not really related to OSProcess.
I could put it on SS3, but that would mean that some of my plugins are on SS3 and others
on SS.com. And I certainly don't want to put it in the VMMaker project on source.squeak.org.
In a case like this it would be convenient if I were able to open a new project for
DirectoryPlugin on squeaksource.com.

Dave

On Fri, Feb 14, 2014 at 09:18:40AM +0100, G?ran Krampe wrote:
Hi G?ran,

I fixed (or just worked around) a couple of bugs, mainly related to WideString
user names. I also moved the repository to a new image borrowed from source.squeak.org
so that it is now running on the same SqueakSource and Seaside code base as
source.squeak.org.

Other than that there are no changes.

Before those changes, squeaksource.com was losing data every time the image was
restarted. This was mainly because the startup list processing was failing due
to a WideString bug, so the normal startup did not complete when the image was
restarted. Then the image required restarting every few weeks due to a socket
handle leak. So every once in a while we would get a span storm of "new update
notices" after someone restarted the squeaksource.com image, and previously
entered data would get lost. There may also have been problems in how the image
was being saved for restart, I'm not really sure.

In any case, those problems are behind us since squeaksource.com was moved to
the servers at squeak.org. I would not say that it is completely problem free,
but it has been quite reliable, and it requires only accasional intervention
by me or one of the box-admins.

Dave

> (Btw, you can reply to squeak-dev with this - fine with me. In fact, I would
> like it to - but that's your call.)

Okay.

> Though I suspect it may have to do with a different view on what SS is these
> days. I don't see it as an archive. An archive is READ ONLY. An archive SAYS
> it is an archive.

Yeah, I think you're right that this is the crux of our disagreement.
The reason I see SS as an archive is the recent history.  That, and
When you have a "service" that, on its home page, tells is users that
new project creation is disabled and to go elsewhere to startup a new
project, -- and also in consideration of WHY that was done, as an act
of _preservation_ (because file-based SS cannot scale), then yes, we
are in "preservation mode" when it comes to SS, hence my aversion to
deleting a bunch of projects out of it.

I did push to make it 100% read-only but, as usual, was foiled by
majority community opinion.  So we now have this half-ass'd "thing"
running out there whose role in our ecosystem is ambiguous, at best.
But, whatever...!

(Note:  "I think we can do it" should have said, "I DON'T think we
need to do it."

> I loved the idea of a canonical catalog. I fought to prevent SS overlapping
> with SM and I lost that fight. These days we have Pharo too - and they are
> recreating their own catalogs etc, even seems to be more than one...
>
> So I consider the fight lost. You only seem to consider Squeak (similar to
> as you accused me of only considering Pharo) - when you say "I think we can
> do it" I don't think you are including the Pharo community in that, are you?

Of course I am including Pharo community!  That's why I mentioned
their "new catalog".

You can't just declare something a catalog because it has a collection
of projects.  There are many more use-cases and requirements of a
catalog than that.

StHub doesn't even have a Browse function, one of the most basic
use-cases of a catalog!  None of the above (except Metacello) knows
one IOTA about anything in any repository other than its own.

By definition, that's not a catalog.

Göran, YOU were the one who, about 10 years ago, opened MY eyes to the
distinction of a Catalog domain from a Source-Code-Repository domain.
What happened man?

>> If you want to put external URL information that one would expect to
>> find in the catalog in the SC repository "notes" field for your
>> projects, you can do that.  But to break into another account and do
>> it is something I think we should ask ourselves, "is this _really_
>> necessary, or should we just have a catalog since that solves this and
>> so many other issues too?"
>
> Again, I agree that a single canonical catalog that everyone would use, both
> Pharo and Squeakers is a great thing to have. But we do not have it.

Hmm, what is this?

    https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-contribution/job/PharoProjectCatalog/HTML_Report/

What is this?

    http://map.squeak.org/

Again, one requirement for a catalog is to document the external URL.
But you want to sprinkle that kind of information into the SC
repository entries "notes" fields themselves.  That's why I used the
word "lame" but

Yeah, the old original text is "preserved" but then the red box is the new text.

Well, maybe that's a solution then.  Assigning someone else as admin /
developer and then taking your name off the projects?

>> Now its same confusion with google-searching and
>> which one is the latest, etc.  Trying to make StHub or SS or SS3 be
>> catalogs just doesn't work when others' projects are involved, I only
>> trying to suggest a better solution.
>
> Current pragmatism is one thing. The ideal solution is another :)
>
> And oh, just to make things even more complex - some Pharo people are moving
> to using github now...

All the more reason, Göran, for you to re-embrace the _idea_ of a real catalog.

Until that idea takes root and people in the community actually
_accept_ it, we will continue to languish in the very "confusion" you
want to avoid.