Celeste status

I am interested in the current status of Celeste. Who of you uses it
regularly? Is there a new version in the works? Does anyone work on
adapting it to 3.9?

I just moved my Celeste image from 3.7 to 3.9alpha and it was an
interesting experience. I found some issues and would like to post them
on Mantis. What is the correct Mantis project for this: Squeak or Squeak
Packages?

One thing I found is that my index file was corrupt. I tracked it down
to a MIME-encoded subject with a CR in it. I have no good fix for it
yet. I fixed it manually. Has anyone of you encountered this?

I use Celeste as my secondary mail client. However, for Squeak I use it
exclusively. I have now 175050 messages so I am putting it under heavy
load. For that database size it is remarkably performant. However, some
things are just too slow so I do not do them anymore like finding
duplicates.

I thought of splitting my mail database by time to make it smaller but I
like the fact that I can search for all mails about a certain topic in
one step. So, I would be interested in working together to make it even
faster.

- Bernhard

Bernhard Pieber <[hidden email]> wrote:
> I just moved my Celeste image from 3.7 to 3.9alpha and it was an
> interesting experience. I found some issues and would like to post them
> on Mantis. What is the correct Mantis project for this: Squeak or Squeak
> Packages?
I am replying to my own message because I just found the answer to my
question. There is already a category named Celeste in the Squeak
project on Mantis. It seems that this project is to be used for all the
packages in the full image.

- Bernhard

On 19.02.2006, at 11:34, Bernhard Pieber wrote:

Yes... but I am not sure if that makes sense in the future... I would  
like
to divide and conquer the bugs a bit more: Having 300 items in one
project does not make too much sense.

So I would propose Squeak Packes. In the long run I would like
to have a complete independend bug tracking for packages: No
need to clutter all those stuff in single lists, IMHO.

The other thing is: Do we really want a "full" image in the sense that
we had it in the past? I tend to never use it, when I need an app that's
normally in full I just install it. Much more important would be a  
"developer"
edition, with RB, Shout, eCompletion...

      Marcus

On 18.02.2006, at 20:53, Bernhard Pieber wrote:

> I am interested in the current status of Celeste. Who of you uses it
> regularly? Is there a new version in the works? Does anyone work on
> adapting it to 3.9?
>

I don't know of anyone.

There is a project on SqueakSource, though:

http://www.squeaksource.com/Celeste.html

It would be best to form a small group of people interested in Celeste
for further developemnt.

       Marcus

Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:
> The other thing is: Do we really want a "full" image in the sense that
> we had it in the past? I tend to never use it, when I need an app that's
> normally in full I just install it. Much more important would be a  
> "developer" edition, with RB, Shout, eCompletion...

I recently wondered how to find out what packages are officially in
"Full" but not in "Basic".

When looking around I found the package FullImage-Tools with the class
Full38ImageBuilder
and the method #packageSpecsOfficialFor38. This method lists:
- Monticello
- YAXO
- Games
- Network-HMTL
- Scamper
- Celeste
- IRCe
- VMMaker
- Vassili's Regex
- Shout
- Balloon3D

However, at least Monticello is already in the 3.9 Basic image.

Then SqueakMap has a Package group called Official package in Full. It
lists:
- 3.7 Full Assembler
- Balloon3D
- Benchmarks
- Celeste
- DefaultExternalDropHandler
- ECoDE Design Environment
- FullImageProjectAlice
- FullImageProjectSmalltalkIntroduction
- FullImageProjectSqueakPresentation
- Games
- HelpViewer
- HTML
- MCInstaller
- Monticello
- MultiSelectionInLists
- Network-HTML
- SARInstaller for 3.6
- Scamper
- SUnit
- Traducciones al Espanol
- VMMaker
- YAXO

This seems a little inconsistent. Who will decide? The new board?

Personally, I would find it very sad if we would not have a full image
for 3.9. Those
projects are great for demoes, e.g. Games and Alice. At least this is
what I show interested
people. I would even say the fuller, the better. So I would include the
RB engine,
eCompletion and other cool goodies. (I'd even vote for including the RB
engine in Basic.)

And I find it very important that everyone uses the full image in the
beta phase, to
make sure it is usable when the release is done.

Cheers,
Bernhard

On 19-Feb-06, at 11:52 AM, Bernhard Pieber wrote:


>
> And I find it very important that everyone uses the full image in the
> beta phase, to
> make sure it is usable when the release is done.
At the very least having a built 'full' image means that some testing  
to make sure all the 'important' packages load and work together will  
be done.


tim
--
tim Rowledge; [hidden email]; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
Useful random insult:- Ready to check in at the HaHa Hilton.

Hi!

Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote:
> On 18.02.2006, at 20:53, Bernhard Pieber wrote:
> > I am interested in the current status of Celeste. Who of you uses it
> > regularly? Is there a new version in the works? Does anyone work on
> > adapting it to 3.9?
>
> I don't know of anyone.

I use it exclusively. An old trusty 3.2 image with bayesian filtering
added. I have 94000 msgs in it.

Actually, you can filter using "m textHas: 'X-Mailer: Celeste'" to find
soul mates. Unfortunately we aren't many - I only found these during
2005:

Celeste 2.0..5989 Lex Spoon
Celeste 2.0..6665 Wolfgang Helbig
Celeste 2.0..6639 Jecel Assumpcao
Celeste 2.0.4917 Göran Krampe
Celeste 2.0..6719 Bernhard Pieber

> There is a project on SqueakSource, though:
>
> http://www.squeaksource.com/Celeste.html
>
> It would be best to form a small group of people interested in Celeste
> for further developemnt.
>
>        Marcus

I will keep using Celeste. But a real overhaul would be nice, perhaps
with a Magma backend. :)

regards, Göran

It needs more protocols - like IMAP.


On Feb 19, 2006, at 2:53 AM, Marcus Denker wrote:

first

what you have in 3.9alpha is not full nor basic. This ALPHA!
 From alpha we will try to do two things:

        - have two full distributions:
                        - one for educators (and we will need people to do this one  
because I'm afraid
                        that we will not have the ressources to do it ourselves).
                       
                        - one for developers
                        this one will contains:
                                Smacc
                                eCompletion
                                shout
                                RB (the engine not the ugly UI)
                                OB
                                Regexp
                                (if people have other needs we can have a cool FullDev)

        - have a basic one
                the goal here is to be able to have the smallest image in which
                other components can be loaded.

But again we are spending our time on that and everybody is welcome  
to HELP!


> And I find it very important that everyone uses the full image in the
> beta phase, to
> make sure it is usable when the release is done.

Indeed this is why we are not removing things first, but are trying  
on the back to
learn how to remove what cannot be easily removed.

Stef

[hidden email] wrote:
> I use it exclusively. An old trusty 3.2 image with bayesian filtering
> added. I have 94000 msgs in it.
And I was feeling bad because I was still using a 3.7-image! (Own dog
food etc.)  ;-)

> Actually, you can filter using "m textHas: 'X-Mailer: Celeste'" to find
> soul mates. Unfortunately we aren't many - I only found these during
> 2005:
Good idea. However, I believe that is one of those things for which the
current implementation is too slow given 175000 messages.

> Celeste 2.0..5989 Lex Spoon
> Celeste 2.0..6665 Wolfgang Helbig
> Celeste 2.0..6639 Jecel Assumpcao
> Celeste 2.0.4917 Göran Krampe
> Celeste 2.0..6719 Bernhard Pieber
Does that mean that Daniel has given up? What a pity! Better than
nothing, though! We can definitely build on that!

> I will keep using Celeste. But a real overhaul would be nice, perhaps
> with a Magma backend. :)
My short term goals are much more modest:
1. Make Celeste work again in 3.9. That means at least:
- Use StandardFileStream where appropriate.
- Fix the bug where a subject contains a CR which corrupts the index
file.
- Use 32 bits instead of 16 bits for the message ids in the category
file.
2. Find at least one fellow user who usese the same code base than me
and wants to stay there. ;-)
3. Find some people to discuss various Celeste design issues with.

Cheers,
Bernhard

P.S. By the way, are you aware of Mantis 2912?

Bernhard Pieber <[hidden email]> wrote:
I am happy with migrating to another codebase - it is about time. :)

> Cheers,
> Bernhard
>
> P.S. By the way, are you aware of Mantis 2912?

Yes, I intend to fix that. A bit stressed this week though.

regards, Göran

=?ISO-8859-1?Q?st=E9phane_ducasse?= <[hidden email]> wrote: IMHO having only one full distribution would be less confusing and
probably also less work. I would use the full image as a demo image, so
it should contain all the cools stuff. The fuller the better. ;-)

> - have a basic one
> the goal here is to be able to have the smallest image in which
> other components can be loaded.
Now I am confused. I thought this was the Minimal image as described in
http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3412.

> But again we are spending our time on that and everybody is welcome  
> to HELP!
This is a good opportunity for me to thank all of you for your effort
and dedication! I appreciate it very much!
I don't want to make any promises but I try my best to make Celeste work
in 3.9 and fix some bugs. I put 2 days into that already, so you see I
am slow. (I would definitely like it to stay in the full release, of
course. ;-)

I am amazed how much progress was made while I was away. It is really,
really great that you finally managed to get Squeak on a Monticello
managed process! I am sure collaboration will be much easier that way.
Having said this, I find it very difficult to make a useful
contribution, if all I have is 30 minutes on an evening. At least in my
experience, I always bump into new problems. And before I have even
started, time is over. Sigh.

Cheers,
Bernhard

Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote: Is there a way to search in Mantis in more than one project at once? If
not, I would prefer to keep all the bugs in full packages in the Squeak
project. Wouldn't filtering of categories work for keeping the overview?
Categories could look like that:
Basic: Kernel
Basic: Collections
...
Full: Shout
...

But these are just my 2 euro cents. If you still prefer I will happily
put Celeste bugs into Squeak Packages! ;-) The Celeste category should
be moved to Squeak Packages then. (The categories could use a little
cleanup, by the way.) Who can do such things in Manis?

Thanks for your support!
Cheers,
Bernhard

Bernhard Pieber wrote on Mon, 20 Feb 2006 23:44:00 +0100
> My short term goals are much more modest:
> 1. Make Celeste work again in 3.9. That means at least:
> - Use StandardFileStream where appropriate.
> - Fix the bug where a subject contains a CR which corrupts the index
> file.
> - Use 32 bits instead of 16 bits for the message ids in the category
> file.

When moving to 3.8 I changed Celeste to use StandardFileStream in a few
places. I haven't run across the subject with CR bug but did find
several others.

> 2. Find at least one fellow user who usese the same code base than me
> and wants to stay there. ;-)

The first step in my case would be to clean up the single change set I
have been using so others can use it as well. It has stuff left over
from debugging (inserting "halt" then removing it), patches to
FastSockets that Göran fixed in a different way, changes to make it 3.8
compatible, changes to deal with bad emails and so on.

Previously I was in a similar situation regarding eIRC but eventually
managed to move to the official version.

> 3. Find some people to discuss various Celeste design issues with.

This list is probably the best place.

-- Jecel

No this is marketing. We want to have one developers image and we  
will do it.
Now you have a demo image.

I remember a post by a smart seaside guy telling us that when he  
arrived to squeak
he was really wondering what a hell is what doing with all these kids  
stuff.
and he made me thinking a lot.


>> - have a basic one
>> the goal here is to be able to have the smallest image in which
>> other components can be loaded.
> Now I am confused. I thought this was the Minimal image as  
> described in
> http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3412

I do not know this was for 3.6 (you know more than 3 years ago).

Perfect. Do it write tests, clean and have fun.

> I am amazed how much progress was made while I was away. It is really,
> really great that you finally managed to get Squeak on a Monticello
> managed process!

I could be improved and it will be improved.

> I am sure collaboration will be much easier that way.
> Having said this, I find it very difficult to make a useful
> contribution, if all I have is 30 minutes on an evening. At least  
> in my
> experience, I always bump into new problems. And before I have even
> started, time is over. Sigh.

Start small.
Write tests for example. Focus on little tasks. I don't have the luxury
to do squeak full time either, so I squeak because I do not watch TV.

Stef

note that fastSocket stream is in 3.9 now under the Socket name!

Stef

> note that fastSocket stream is in 3.9 now under the
> Socket name!

Huh?  FastSocketStream was renamed to Socket?  What of
the 3.8 Socket?

On 21.02.2006, at 19:32, Chris Muller wrote:

>> note that fastSocket stream is in 3.9 now under the
>> Socket name!
>
> Huh?  FastSocketStream was renamed to Socket?  What of
> the 3.8 Socket?


FastSocketStream replaced SocketStream... many (if not all) serious  
users (e.g. from the
Seaside community) were using FastSocketStream already for some time  
and they reported positive results.

The description on SqueakMap:

      FastSocketStream is a reimplementation of SocketStream - the  
class that originates from the original
      Comanche implementation but now is included in standard Squeak.  
FSS has the same protocol as
      SS and is meant to replace it. FSS is much faster, more  
flexible, is better documented and adds a few features.

The switch was done early in 3.9a (Aug 05) and there have been no  
problems reported. The 3.8.1
team just decided to do the same, so in 3.8.1 SocketStream will use  
the FastSocketStream
implementation, too.

        Marcus

Ok, Stéphane just meant the "Fast" prefix was dropped,
leaving "SocketStream" not "Socket" (which is
lower-level functionality).

thanks..

--- Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> wrote: