[BetaTesting] [ANN] Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1
Locked
12
12
Re: [BetaTesting] [ANN] Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1
 
|
Hi Mariano,
No problem. I was just a bit confused because I was not sure whether you intended to add O2 back into Pharo 1.0 ;) Cheers, Adrian On Mar 24, 2010, at 13:49 , Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Adrian Lienhard <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> Hi Mariano, >> >> I wonder why you mentioned O2 issues below because O2 is not in Pharo >> anymore, isn't it? >> >> > Sorry Adrian. I forgot about this email. I answer to the mail as it has an > excellent question and my bad :) > > I put the O2 issues because: > > - I think it is a "official package that works on Pharo" even if we don't > know what a official package is. > - I have to create a version of the metacello configuration for O2 and I > wanted to put the issues in the "description" of the release > - The O2 issues were submitted in Pharo issue tracking, thus, I wanted to > put them as closed and put "integrated in PharoXXX" > - I changed the welcome workspace to load this new version of O2 > > However, it doesn't mean that O2 is now included in Dev images. Now you made > me realize that this can be confusing. So, what should I do ? I am all ears > :) > > > >> Cheers, >> Adrian >> >> On Mar 20, 2010, at 20:40 , Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >> >>> Hi folks. We are proud to announce the (hopefully) last RC3 for Pharo >> 1.0. >>> >>> This image is based in PharoCore-1.0-10515rc3. The image also contain lot >> of >>> fixes and improvements of external packages: >>> >>> These, are the fixed issues of the external tools: >>> >>> OB: Issues 1891, 1748, 1670, 1667, 1705, 1667 >>> >>> O2: issues 1887, 1312, 1429, 1886, 2073 >>> >>> New Inspector: issues 1783, 1499 >>> >>> Refactoring Browser: issue 2108 >>> >>> The link is: >>> >> https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/26680/Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1.zip >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Mariano >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: [BetaTesting] [ANN] Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1
|
|
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Adrian Lienhard <[hidden email]> wrote: Hi Mariano, Yes, I know. But I asked what do you think because I don't want to get more users confused ahahhaha
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: [BetaTesting] [ANN] Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1
|
|
On Mar 24, 2010, at 13:56 , Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 1:53 PM, Adrian Lienhard <[hidden email]> wrote: > >> Hi Mariano, >> >> No problem. I was just a bit confused because I was not sure whether you >> intended to add O2 back into Pharo 1.0 ;) >> > > > Yes, I know. But I asked what do you think because I don't want to get more > users confused ahahhaha Sorry, I don't understand what you mean. Think about what? Adrian > > > >> >> Cheers, >> Adrian >> >> On Mar 24, 2010, at 13:49 , Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >> >>> On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Adrian Lienhard <[hidden email]> >> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Mariano, >>>> >>>> I wonder why you mentioned O2 issues below because O2 is not in Pharo >>>> anymore, isn't it? >>>> >>>> >>> Sorry Adrian. I forgot about this email. I answer to the mail as it has >> an >>> excellent question and my bad :) >>> >>> I put the O2 issues because: >>> >>> - I think it is a "official package that works on Pharo" even if we don't >>> know what a official package is. >>> - I have to create a version of the metacello configuration for O2 and I >>> wanted to put the issues in the "description" of the release >>> - The O2 issues were submitted in Pharo issue tracking, thus, I wanted to >>> put them as closed and put "integrated in PharoXXX" >>> - I changed the welcome workspace to load this new version of O2 >>> >>> However, it doesn't mean that O2 is now included in Dev images. Now you >> made >>> me realize that this can be confusing. So, what should I do ? I am all >> ears >>> :) >>> >>> >>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Adrian >>>> >>>> On Mar 20, 2010, at 20:40 , Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi folks. We are proud to announce the (hopefully) last RC3 for Pharo >>>> 1.0. >>>>> >>>>> This image is based in PharoCore-1.0-10515rc3. The image also contain >> lot >>>> of >>>>> fixes and improvements of external packages: >>>>> >>>>> These, are the fixed issues of the external tools: >>>>> >>>>> OB: Issues 1891, 1748, 1670, 1667, 1705, 1667 >>>>> >>>>> O2: issues 1887, 1312, 1429, 1886, 2073 >>>>> >>>>> New Inspector: issues 1783, 1499 >>>>> >>>>> Refactoring Browser: issue 2108 >>>>> >>>>> The link is: >>>>> >>>> >> https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/26680/Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1.zip >>>>> >>>>> Cheers >>>>> >>>>> Mariano >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>> [hidden email] >>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: [BetaTesting] [ANN] Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1
|
|
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
I do not have a definite answer. I personally prefer O2 instead of OB.
OB is more stable though, which is a big advantage. Maybe a pool will help the community to say its word on it? Whether it wants to see O2 included or not in Pharo 1.0. Like this, you will not have to make an arbitrary decision. just an idea. Cheers, Alexandre On 24 Mar 2010, at 08:49, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Adrian Lienhard <[hidden email]> > wrote: > Hi Mariano, > > I wonder why you mentioned O2 issues below because O2 is not in > Pharo anymore, isn't it? > > > Sorry Adrian. I forgot about this email. I answer to the mail as it > has an excellent question and my bad :) > > I put the O2 issues because: > > - I think it is a "official package that works on Pharo" even if we > don't know what a official package is. > - I have to create a version of the metacello configuration for O2 > and I wanted to put the issues in the "description" of the release > - The O2 issues were submitted in Pharo issue tracking, thus, I > wanted to put them as closed and put "integrated in PharoXXX" > - I changed the welcome workspace to load this new version of O2 > > However, it doesn't mean that O2 is now included in Dev images. Now > you made me realize that this can be confusing. So, what should I > do ? I am all ears :) > > > Cheers, > Adrian > > On Mar 20, 2010, at 20:40 , Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > Hi folks. We are proud to announce the (hopefully) last RC3 for > Pharo 1.0. > > > > This image is based in PharoCore-1.0-10515rc3. The image also > contain lot of > > fixes and improvements of external packages: > > > > These, are the fixed issues of the external tools: > > > > OB: Issues 1891, 1748, 1670, 1667, 1705, 1667 > > > > O2: issues 1887, 1312, 1429, 1886, 2073 > > > > New Inspector: issues 1783, 1499 > > > > Refactoring Browser: issue 2108 > > > > The link is: > > https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/26680/Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1.zip > > > > Cheers > > > > Mariano > > _______________________________________________ > > Pharo-project mailing list > > [hidden email] > > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: [BetaTesting] [ANN] Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1
|
|
Sorry. Want I wanted to ask is...for next Pharo releases, I do the same but making clear O2 is not by default ? or I just don't say anything about O2 in the release ?
On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Alexandre Bergel <[hidden email]> wrote: I do not have a definite answer. I personally prefer O2 instead of OB. OB is more stable though, which is a big advantage. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: [BetaTesting] [ANN] Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1
|
|
For Pharo 1.0 it is clear that it does not include O2.
For Pharo 1.1 we can consider adding it again if it is stable and people express their interest in it. So, Mariano, until we add O2 back into the main release, you don't need to mention it anymore as part of the release log. Of course, if there are new versions and fixes please mention them in a separate thread as it is good to communicate any progress of internal and external packages. Cheers, Adrian On Mar 24, 2010, at 14:15 , Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > Sorry. Want I wanted to ask is...for next Pharo releases, I do the same but > making clear O2 is not by default ? or I just don't say anything about O2 > in the release ? > > On Wed, Mar 24, 2010 at 3:03 PM, Alexandre Bergel <[hidden email]>wrote: > >> I do not have a definite answer. I personally prefer O2 instead of OB. OB >> is more stable though, which is a big advantage. >> Maybe a pool will help the community to say its word on it? Whether it >> wants to see O2 included or not in Pharo 1.0. Like this, you will not have >> to make an arbitrary decision. just an idea. >> >> Cheers, >> Alexandre >> >> >> >> On 24 Mar 2010, at 08:49, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >> >> >>> >>> On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Adrian Lienhard <[hidden email]> >>> wrote: >>> Hi Mariano, >>> >>> I wonder why you mentioned O2 issues below because O2 is not in Pharo >>> anymore, isn't it? >>> >>> >>> Sorry Adrian. I forgot about this email. I answer to the mail as it has an >>> excellent question and my bad :) >>> >>> I put the O2 issues because: >>> >>> - I think it is a "official package that works on Pharo" even if we don't >>> know what a official package is. >>> - I have to create a version of the metacello configuration for O2 and I >>> wanted to put the issues in the "description" of the release >>> - The O2 issues were submitted in Pharo issue tracking, thus, I wanted to >>> put them as closed and put "integrated in PharoXXX" >>> - I changed the welcome workspace to load this new version of O2 >>> >>> However, it doesn't mean that O2 is now included in Dev images. Now you >>> made me realize that this can be confusing. So, what should I do ? I am all >>> ears :) >>> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Adrian >>> >>> On Mar 20, 2010, at 20:40 , Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >>> >>>> Hi folks. We are proud to announce the (hopefully) last RC3 for Pharo >>> 1.0. >>>> >>>> This image is based in PharoCore-1.0-10515rc3. The image also contain >>> lot of >>>> fixes and improvements of external packages: >>>> >>>> These, are the fixed issues of the external tools: >>>> >>>> OB: Issues 1891, 1748, 1670, 1667, 1705, 1667 >>>> >>>> O2: issues 1887, 1312, 1429, 1886, 2073 >>>> >>>> New Inspector: issues 1783, 1499 >>>> >>>> Refactoring Browser: issue 2108 >>>> >>>> The link is: >>>> >>> https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/26680/Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1.zip >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> Mariano >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>> [hidden email] >>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >> >> -- >> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: >> Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu >> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: [BetaTesting] [ANN] Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1
|
|
In reply to this post by Alexandre Bergel
On 24 mars 2010, at 15:03, Alexandre Bergel wrote: > I do not have a definite answer. I personally prefer O2 instead of OB. OB is more stable though, which is a big advantage. > Maybe a pool will help the community to say its word on it? Whether it wants to see O2 included or not in Pharo 1.0. Like this, you will not have to make an arbitrary decision. just an idea. I recently came back to O2 and it's a huge relief in usability. However as Alex puts it, OB is more stable (for example in O2, I just noticed that I dont have anymore the completion in the mercury bar). In favor of pushing 1.0 release, I am for keeping OB because it is stable. However, I remember that it also impacts the book pharo by example, which has to use only one browser. > > Cheers, > Alexandre > > > On 24 Mar 2010, at 08:49, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > >> >> >> On Sun, Mar 21, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Adrian Lienhard <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Hi Mariano, >> >> I wonder why you mentioned O2 issues below because O2 is not in Pharo anymore, isn't it? >> >> >> Sorry Adrian. I forgot about this email. I answer to the mail as it has an excellent question and my bad :) >> >> I put the O2 issues because: >> >> - I think it is a "official package that works on Pharo" even if we don't know what a official package is. >> - I have to create a version of the metacello configuration for O2 and I wanted to put the issues in the "description" of the release >> - The O2 issues were submitted in Pharo issue tracking, thus, I wanted to put them as closed and put "integrated in PharoXXX" >> - I changed the welcome workspace to load this new version of O2 >> >> However, it doesn't mean that O2 is now included in Dev images. Now you made me realize that this can be confusing. So, what should I do ? I am all ears :) >> >> >> Cheers, >> Adrian >> >> On Mar 20, 2010, at 20:40 , Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >> >> > Hi folks. We are proud to announce the (hopefully) last RC3 for Pharo 1.0. >> > >> > This image is based in PharoCore-1.0-10515rc3. The image also contain lot of >> > fixes and improvements of external packages: >> > >> > These, are the fixed issues of the external tools: >> > >> > OB: Issues 1891, 1748, 1670, 1667, 1705, 1667 >> > >> > O2: issues 1887, 1312, 1429, 1886, 2073 >> > >> > New Inspector: issues 1783, 1499 >> > >> > Refactoring Browser: issue 2108 >> > >> > The link is: >> > https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/26680/Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1.zip >> > >> > Cheers >> > >> > Mariano >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Pharo-project mailing list >> > [hidden email] >> > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > -- > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project -- Simon _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: [BetaTesting] [ANN] Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1
Administrator
|
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
While choice is a good thing it does make things more complicated and the PBE book will need to just choose one I guess. It should be easier to swap betweem OB or O2 though, maybe not necessarily both in the same image at the same time but easy to load/unload. Have they really moved that far apart that the initial idea of OB-Enhancements is not possible? |
Re: [BetaTesting] [ANN] Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1
|
|
On Mar 25, 2010, at 8:53 AM, Geert Claes wrote: > > > Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >> >> Sorry. Want I wanted to ask is...for next Pharo releases, I do the same >> but >> making clear O2 is not by default ? or I just don't say anything about O2 >> in the release ? >> > > While choice is a good thing it does make things more complicated and the > PBE book will need to just choose one I guess. It should be easier to swap > betweem OB or O2 though, maybe not necessarily both in the same image at the > same time but easy to load/unload. > > Have they really moved that far apart that the initial idea of > OB-Enhancements is not possible? > 1.0 is *DONE* *DONE* *DONE*. We should not discuss changing now everthing again. We can do that for 1.1 1.0 does not have O2. So for the book, there will be a special image with O2 loaded. Marcus -- Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: [BetaTesting] [ANN] Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1
|
|
+1
1.1 is waiting for you guys and it is sexy and requires people to use it :) On Mar 25, 2010, at 9:00 AM, Marcus Denker wrote: > > On Mar 25, 2010, at 8:53 AM, Geert Claes wrote: > >> >> >> Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >>> >>> Sorry. Want I wanted to ask is...for next Pharo releases, I do the same >>> but >>> making clear O2 is not by default ? or I just don't say anything about O2 >>> in the release ? >>> >> >> While choice is a good thing it does make things more complicated and the >> PBE book will need to just choose one I guess. It should be easier to swap >> betweem OB or O2 though, maybe not necessarily both in the same image at the >> same time but easy to load/unload. >> >> Have they really moved that far apart that the initial idea of >> OB-Enhancements is not possible? >> > > 1.0 is *DONE* *DONE* *DONE*. We should not discuss changing now everthing again. > We can do that for 1.1 > > 1.0 does not have O2. > > So for the book, there will be a special image with O2 loaded. > > Marcus > > > -- > Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de > INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: [BetaTesting] [ANN] Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1
|
|
In reply to this post by Geert Claes
> Have they really moved that far apart that the initial idea of
> OB-Enhancements is not possible? OB-Enhancements patches and changes the OB meta-model and the morphic view in ways that break other browsers and unit tests that have not been built with OB-Enahncements in mind. It is possible to load either of the two browsers, and even both, in any recent Pharo image. I am using OB in Pharo 1.0 and 1.1. OB passes all tests in both environments., including eCompletion, Shout and the Refactoring Engine. http://hudson.lukas-renggli.ch/job/Development/lastCompletedBuild/testReport/(root)/ Lukas -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: [BetaTesting] [ANN] Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1
|
|
In reply to this post by Stéphane Ducasse
Hi,
But if it is done, why don't you just release the official one? Cheers, Doru On 25 Mar 2010, at 09:25, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > +1 > > 1.1 is waiting for you guys and it is sexy and requires people to > use it :) > > On Mar 25, 2010, at 9:00 AM, Marcus Denker wrote: > >> >> On Mar 25, 2010, at 8:53 AM, Geert Claes wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >>>> >>>> Sorry. Want I wanted to ask is...for next Pharo releases, I do >>>> the same >>>> but >>>> making clear O2 is not by default ? or I just don't say anything >>>> about O2 >>>> in the release ? >>>> >>> >>> While choice is a good thing it does make things more complicated >>> and the >>> PBE book will need to just choose one I guess. It should be >>> easier to swap >>> betweem OB or O2 though, maybe not necessarily both in the same >>> image at the >>> same time but easy to load/unload. >>> >>> Have they really moved that far apart that the initial idea of >>> OB-Enhancements is not possible? >>> >> >> 1.0 is *DONE* *DONE* *DONE*. We should not discuss changing now >> everthing again. >> We can do that for 1.1 >> >> 1.0 does not have O2. >> >> So for the book, there will be a special image with O2 loaded. >> >> Marcus >> >> >> -- >> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de >> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project -- www.tudorgirba.com "Reasonable is what we are accustomed with." _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: [BetaTesting] [ANN] Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1
|
|
good question.
I'm doing 1.1 and 1.0 is not in my radar. We should learn for 1.1 to make it faster and one way is to get tests greener before. Stef > Hi, > > But if it is done, why don't you just release the official one? > > Cheers, > Doru > > > On 25 Mar 2010, at 09:25, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > >> +1 >> >> 1.1 is waiting for you guys and it is sexy and requires people to use it :) >> >> On Mar 25, 2010, at 9:00 AM, Marcus Denker wrote: >> >>> >>> On Mar 25, 2010, at 8:53 AM, Geert Claes wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >>>>> >>>>> Sorry. Want I wanted to ask is...for next Pharo releases, I do the same >>>>> but >>>>> making clear O2 is not by default ? or I just don't say anything about O2 >>>>> in the release ? >>>>> >>>> >>>> While choice is a good thing it does make things more complicated and the >>>> PBE book will need to just choose one I guess. It should be easier to swap >>>> betweem OB or O2 though, maybe not necessarily both in the same image at the >>>> same time but easy to load/unload. >>>> >>>> Have they really moved that far apart that the initial idea of >>>> OB-Enhancements is not possible? >>>> >>> >>> 1.0 is *DONE* *DONE* *DONE*. We should not discuss changing now everthing again. >>> We can do that for 1.1 >>> >>> 1.0 does not have O2. >>> >>> So for the book, there will be a special image with O2 loaded. >>> >>> Marcus >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de >>> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > -- > www.tudorgirba.com > > "Reasonable is what we are accustomed with." > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: [BetaTesting] [ANN] Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1
|
|
Because there are a few things left that still need to be done for the release:
- make all tests in Pharo 1.0 pass - write a clean and complete change log (I did a pass this morning) [1] - use different Metacello version? - create a one-click image Cheers, Adrian [1] http://code.google.com/p/pharo/wiki/ActionsInPharoOneDotOne On Mar 25, 2010, at 10:20 , Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > good question. > I'm doing 1.1 and 1.0 is not in my radar. > We should learn for 1.1 to make it faster and one way is to get tests greener before. > > Stef > > >> Hi, >> >> But if it is done, why don't you just release the official one? >> >> Cheers, >> Doru >> >> >> On 25 Mar 2010, at 09:25, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> 1.1 is waiting for you guys and it is sexy and requires people to use it :) >>> >>> On Mar 25, 2010, at 9:00 AM, Marcus Denker wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> On Mar 25, 2010, at 8:53 AM, Geert Claes wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Sorry. Want I wanted to ask is...for next Pharo releases, I do the same >>>>>> but >>>>>> making clear O2 is not by default ? or I just don't say anything about O2 >>>>>> in the release ? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> While choice is a good thing it does make things more complicated and the >>>>> PBE book will need to just choose one I guess. It should be easier to swap >>>>> betweem OB or O2 though, maybe not necessarily both in the same image at the >>>>> same time but easy to load/unload. >>>>> >>>>> Have they really moved that far apart that the initial idea of >>>>> OB-Enhancements is not possible? >>>>> >>>> >>>> 1.0 is *DONE* *DONE* *DONE*. We should not discuss changing now everthing again. >>>> We can do that for 1.1 >>>> >>>> 1.0 does not have O2. >>>> >>>> So for the book, there will be a special image with O2 loaded. >>>> >>>> Marcus >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de >>>> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>> [hidden email] >>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> -- >> www.tudorgirba.com >> >> "Reasonable is what we are accustomed with." >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
|
|
Adrian,
1.0-beta.25 has been released. So it is now _stable_ . No new issues have appeared, yet, but if any do appear I'll do a dot release. Dale ----- "Adrian Lienhard" <[hidden email]> wrote: | Because there are a few things left that still need to be done for the | release: | - make all tests in Pharo 1.0 pass | - write a clean and complete change log (I did a pass this morning) | [1] | - use different Metacello version? | - create a one-click image | | Cheers, | Adrian | | [1] http://code.google.com/p/pharo/wiki/ActionsInPharoOneDotOne | | On Mar 25, 2010, at 10:20 , Stéphane Ducasse wrote: | | > good question. | > I'm doing 1.1 and 1.0 is not in my radar. | > We should learn for 1.1 to make it faster and one way is to get | tests greener before. | > | > Stef | > | > | >> Hi, | >> | >> But if it is done, why don't you just release the official one? | >> | >> Cheers, | >> Doru | >> | >> | >> On 25 Mar 2010, at 09:25, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: | >> | >>> +1 | >>> | >>> 1.1 is waiting for you guys and it is sexy and requires people to | use it :) | >>> | >>> On Mar 25, 2010, at 9:00 AM, Marcus Denker wrote: | >>> | >>>> | >>>> On Mar 25, 2010, at 8:53 AM, Geert Claes wrote: | >>>> | >>>>> | >>>>> | >>>>> Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: | >>>>>> | >>>>>> Sorry. Want I wanted to ask is...for next Pharo releases, I do | the same | >>>>>> but | >>>>>> making clear O2 is not by default ? or I just don't say | anything about O2 | >>>>>> in the release ? | >>>>>> | >>>>> | >>>>> While choice is a good thing it does make things more | complicated and the | >>>>> PBE book will need to just choose one I guess. It should be | easier to swap | >>>>> betweem OB or O2 though, maybe not necessarily both in the same | image at the | >>>>> same time but easy to load/unload. | >>>>> | >>>>> Have they really moved that far apart that the initial idea of | >>>>> OB-Enhancements is not possible? | >>>>> | >>>> | >>>> 1.0 is *DONE* *DONE* *DONE*. We should not discuss changing now | everthing again. | >>>> We can do that for 1.1 | >>>> | >>>> 1.0 does not have O2. | >>>> | >>>> So for the book, there will be a special image with O2 loaded. | >>>> | >>>> Marcus | >>>> | >>>> | >>>> -- | >>>> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de | >>>> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. | >>>> | >>>> | >>>> _______________________________________________ | >>>> Pharo-project mailing list | >>>> [hidden email] | >>>> | http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project | >>> | >>> | >>> _______________________________________________ | >>> Pharo-project mailing list | >>> [hidden email] | >>> | http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project | >> | >> -- | >> www.tudorgirba.com | >> | >> "Reasonable is what we are accustomed with." | >> | >> | >> _______________________________________________ | >> Pharo-project mailing list | >> [hidden email] | >> | http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project | > | > | > _______________________________________________ | > Pharo-project mailing list | > [hidden email] | > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project | | | _______________________________________________ | Pharo-project mailing list | [hidden email] | http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: [BetaTesting] [ANN] Pharo-1.0-10515-rc3dev10.03.1
|
|
thanks for the info, Dale
Adrian On Mar 25, 2010, at 18:10 , Dale Henrichs wrote: > Adrian, > > 1.0-beta.25 has been released. So it is now _stable_ . No new issues have appeared, yet, but if any do appear I'll do a dot release. > > Dale > ----- "Adrian Lienhard" <[hidden email]> wrote: > > | Because there are a few things left that still need to be done for the > | release: > | - make all tests in Pharo 1.0 pass > | - write a clean and complete change log (I did a pass this morning) > | [1] > | - use different Metacello version? > | - create a one-click image > | > | Cheers, > | Adrian > | > | [1] http://code.google.com/p/pharo/wiki/ActionsInPharoOneDotOne > | > | On Mar 25, 2010, at 10:20 , Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > | > | > good question. > | > I'm doing 1.1 and 1.0 is not in my radar. > | > We should learn for 1.1 to make it faster and one way is to get > | tests greener before. > | > > | > Stef > | > > | > > | >> Hi, > | >> > | >> But if it is done, why don't you just release the official one? > | >> > | >> Cheers, > | >> Doru > | >> > | >> > | >> On 25 Mar 2010, at 09:25, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > | >> > | >>> +1 > | >>> > | >>> 1.1 is waiting for you guys and it is sexy and requires people to > | use it :) > | >>> > | >>> On Mar 25, 2010, at 9:00 AM, Marcus Denker wrote: > | >>> > | >>>> > | >>>> On Mar 25, 2010, at 8:53 AM, Geert Claes wrote: > | >>>> > | >>>>> > | >>>>> > | >>>>> Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > | >>>>>> > | >>>>>> Sorry. Want I wanted to ask is...for next Pharo releases, I do > | the same > | >>>>>> but > | >>>>>> making clear O2 is not by default ? or I just don't say > | anything about O2 > | >>>>>> in the release ? > | >>>>>> > | >>>>> > | >>>>> While choice is a good thing it does make things more > | complicated and the > | >>>>> PBE book will need to just choose one I guess. It should be > | easier to swap > | >>>>> betweem OB or O2 though, maybe not necessarily both in the same > | image at the > | >>>>> same time but easy to load/unload. > | >>>>> > | >>>>> Have they really moved that far apart that the initial idea of > | >>>>> OB-Enhancements is not possible? > | >>>>> > | >>>> > | >>>> 1.0 is *DONE* *DONE* *DONE*. We should not discuss changing now > | everthing again. > | >>>> We can do that for 1.1 > | >>>> > | >>>> 1.0 does not have O2. > | >>>> > | >>>> So for the book, there will be a special image with O2 loaded. > | >>>> > | >>>> Marcus > | >>>> > | >>>> > | >>>> -- > | >>>> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de > | >>>> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. > | >>>> > | >>>> > | >>>> _______________________________________________ > | >>>> Pharo-project mailing list > | >>>> [hidden email] > | >>>> > | http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > | >>> > | >>> > | >>> _______________________________________________ > | >>> Pharo-project mailing list > | >>> [hidden email] > | >>> > | http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > | >> > | >> -- > | >> www.tudorgirba.com > | >> > | >> "Reasonable is what we are accustomed with." > | >> > | >> > | >> _______________________________________________ > | >> Pharo-project mailing list > | >> [hidden email] > | >> > | http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > | > > | > > | > _______________________________________________ > | > Pharo-project mailing list > | > [hidden email] > | > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > | > | > | _______________________________________________ > | Pharo-project mailing list > | [hidden email] > | http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
«
Return to Pharo Smalltalk Developers
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |