GitHub and Zinc

> Johan,
>
> You have an existing pull request for Zinc. If you make a benign change and do a new commit on your branch and then push that commit to GitHub it will trigger a travisCI build ... it will make a nice example of how pull requests and travis work together ...
>
> Dale
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> | From: "Dale K. Henrichs" <[hidden email]>
> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion" <[hidden email]>
> | Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 12:05:19 PM
> | Subject: GitHub and Zinc
> |
> | As you probably all know, I've spent the bulk of the last year or so
> | working on GitHub, TravisCI, FileTree, Metacello and tODE. My
> | primary motivation has been to improve the collaboration experience
> | for GLASS.
> |
> | Recently I have had the opportunity to collaborate with Christophe
> | Demarey on porting the Metacello Preview to Pharo2.0 leveraging the
> | collaboration facilities available on GitHub and TravisCI. The
> | effort has been very successful and I think it is time to start
> | leveraging GitHub and TravisCI for GLASS development.
> |
> | John's bug report this morning makes me think that the Zinc project
> | will be a good first step to working out the kinks in using
> | GitHub/TravisCI.
> |
> | I have just now finished setting up the Zinc project to automatically
> | run TravisCI builds for all commits/pull requests[1]. The tests are
> | failing on both gemstone2.4 and gemstone3.1 branches, but I assume
> | that folks are actually using Zinc in production and have either got
> | fixes for some of the test failures, or the tests are failing in
> | benign ways ...
> |
> | For gemstone2.4 the following tests are failing:
> |
> | **************************************************************************************
> | Results for anArray( 'BaselineOfZinc') Test Suite
> | 240 run, 232 passes, 4 expected defects, 4 failures, 0 errors, 0
> | unexpected passes
> | **************************************************************************************
> | *** FAILURES *******************
> | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testCookiesForUrl'.
> | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testCookieAtForUrl'.
> | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testAdd'.
> | ZnMagicCookieTests debug: #'testFromString'.
> | **************************************************************************************
> |
> | For gemstone3.1 the same tests are failing along with a bunch of
> | errors[2].
> |
> | Ken has a fork of gemstone3.1 and I am suspicious that his branch may
> | have fixes for many of the gemstone3.1 issues/errors. Johan has a
> | fork of gemstone2.4 with a fix for a particular test. We have Johns'
> | bug report. We have new checkins from Sven that have yet to be
> | integrated.
> |
> | The fork/pull request model on GitHub works very well for submitting
> | updates for inclusion in the main repository:
> |
> |   - tests are run with TravisCI
> |   - and the changes made in pull request can be reviewed with
> |   comments
> |
> | So a green run combined with a clean code review, means that fixes
> | can be merged into the release branch and folks can feel comfortable
> | either using the branch directly or integrating into their own
> | forks.
> |
> | Moving forward their are additional projects like porting Seaside3.1
> | to GemStone that we can collaborate on. Paul and I have already
> | started on the project, but haven't touched in the last couple of
> | weeks[3]&[4]. Presumably there is also interest in getting Zodiac[4]
> | ported to GemStone as well...
> |
> | The code is all being managed in the glassdb organization on GitHub
> | and I can add GLASS developers to the organization so that I won't
> | be the only person with the ability to approve pull requests ...
> | getting me off the critical path for doing integration ..
> |
> | I'm not thinking that everyone will drop what they are doing and
> | start work in Zinc (myself I'm preparing for a STIC talk next week
> | so I'm not going to be able to do too much between now and then),
> | but we can start talking about the mechanics and when folks find
> | opportunities to contribute we'll have an idea how we want to
> | proceed.
> |
> | Dale
> |
> |
> | [1] https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc
> | [2] https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc/jobs/7744348#L128
> | [3] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside30
> | [4] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside31
> | [5] https://github.com/glassdb/zodiac
> |

> Johan,
>
> No nothing broken and I have not even looked at the commit ... I just figured that a pull request on your part (or Ken's) will get things started.
>
> We are all busy, but if we start leveraging github and travis-ci I think we will be more efficient in managing contributions ... folks can contribute a patch for a single test and the whole community can track progress towards green tests ...
>
> Dale
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion" <[hidden email]>
> | Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2013 12:28:11 PM
> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
> |
> | Hi Dale,
> |
> | Thanks for pulling the rope here.
> |
> | I made a benign change... did that do something?
> | Mind that I noticed how the commit also showed a lot more changed
> | lines than what I actually changed. Seems like a filetree issue.
> |
> | This was already quite some time ago. I will take a look soon to
> | create a new pull request.
> |
> | ps: yes, we are using this version of Zinc in production and it's
> | working very well. The failing tests are not harming us and we were
> | already anticipating that we should bring the gemstone port up to
> | speed with the current status in Pharo. hence...
> |
> | On 03 Jun 2013, at 21:43, Dale K. Henrichs
> | <[hidden email]> wrote:
> |
> | > Johan,
> | >
> | > You have an existing pull request for Zinc. If you make a benign
> | > change and do a new commit on your branch and then push that
> | > commit to GitHub it will trigger a travisCI build ... it will make
> | > a nice example of how pull requests and travis work together ...
> | >
> | > Dale
> | >
> | >
> | > ----- Original Message -----
> | > | From: "Dale K. Henrichs" <[hidden email]>
> | > | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
> | > | <[hidden email]>
> | > | Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 12:05:19 PM
> | > | Subject: GitHub and Zinc
> | > |
> | > | As you probably all know, I've spent the bulk of the last year or
> | > | so
> | > | working on GitHub, TravisCI, FileTree, Metacello and tODE. My
> | > | primary motivation has been to improve the collaboration
> | > | experience
> | > | for GLASS.
> | > |
> | > | Recently I have had the opportunity to collaborate with
> | > | Christophe
> | > | Demarey on porting the Metacello Preview to Pharo2.0 leveraging
> | > | the
> | > | collaboration facilities available on GitHub and TravisCI. The
> | > | effort has been very successful and I think it is time to start
> | > | leveraging GitHub and TravisCI for GLASS development.
> | > |
> | > | John's bug report this morning makes me think that the Zinc
> | > | project
> | > | will be a good first step to working out the kinks in using
> | > | GitHub/TravisCI.
> | > |
> | > | I have just now finished setting up the Zinc project to
> | > | automatically
> | > | run TravisCI builds for all commits/pull requests[1]. The tests
> | > | are
> | > | failing on both gemstone2.4 and gemstone3.1 branches, but I
> | > | assume
> | > | that folks are actually using Zinc in production and have either
> | > | got
> | > | fixes for some of the test failures, or the tests are failing in
> | > | benign ways ...
> | > |
> | > | For gemstone2.4 the following tests are failing:
> | > |
> | > | **************************************************************************************
> | > | Results for anArray( 'BaselineOfZinc') Test Suite
> | > | 240 run, 232 passes, 4 expected defects, 4 failures, 0 errors, 0
> | > | unexpected passes
> | > | **************************************************************************************
> | > | *** FAILURES *******************
> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testCookiesForUrl'.
> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testCookieAtForUrl'.
> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testAdd'.
> | > | ZnMagicCookieTests debug: #'testFromString'.
> | > | **************************************************************************************
> | > |
> | > | For gemstone3.1 the same tests are failing along with a bunch of
> | > | errors[2].
> | > |
> | > | Ken has a fork of gemstone3.1 and I am suspicious that his branch
> | > | may
> | > | have fixes for many of the gemstone3.1 issues/errors. Johan has a
> | > | fork of gemstone2.4 with a fix for a particular test. We have
> | > | Johns'
> | > | bug report. We have new checkins from Sven that have yet to be
> | > | integrated.
> | > |
> | > | The fork/pull request model on GitHub works very well for
> | > | submitting
> | > | updates for inclusion in the main repository:
> | > |
> | > |   - tests are run with TravisCI
> | > |   - and the changes made in pull request can be reviewed with
> | > |   comments
> | > |
> | > | So a green run combined with a clean code review, means that
> | > | fixes
> | > | can be merged into the release branch and folks can feel
> | > | comfortable
> | > | either using the branch directly or integrating into their own
> | > | forks.
> | > |
> | > | Moving forward their are additional projects like porting
> | > | Seaside3.1
> | > | to GemStone that we can collaborate on. Paul and I have already
> | > | started on the project, but haven't touched in the last couple of
> | > | weeks[3]&[4]. Presumably there is also interest in getting
> | > | Zodiac[4]
> | > | ported to GemStone as well...
> | > |
> | > | The code is all being managed in the glassdb organization on
> | > | GitHub
> | > | and I can add GLASS developers to the organization so that I
> | > | won't
> | > | be the only person with the ability to approve pull requests ...
> | > | getting me off the critical path for doing integration ..
> | > |
> | > | I'm not thinking that everyone will drop what they are doing and
> | > | start work in Zinc (myself I'm preparing for a STIC talk next
> | > | week
> | > | so I'm not going to be able to do too much between now and then),
> | > | but we can start talking about the mechanics and when folks find
> | > | opportunities to contribute we'll have an idea how we want to
> | > | proceed.
> | > |
> | > | Dale
> | > |
> | > |
> | > | [1] https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc
> | > | [2] https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc/jobs/7744348#L128
> | > | [3] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside30
> | > | [4] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside31
> | > | [5] https://github.com/glassdb/zodiac
> | > |
> |
> |

> Dale,
>
> I did a change to the pull request but nothing happened.
>
> I have never used travis-CI, so what should I do more to trigger the build here?
>
> On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:05, "Dale K. Henrichs" <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> Johan,
>>
>> No nothing broken and I have not even looked at the commit ... I just figured that a pull request on your part (or Ken's) will get things started.
>>
>> We are all busy, but if we start leveraging github and travis-ci I think we will be more efficient in managing contributions ... folks can contribute a patch for a single test and the whole community can track progress towards green tests ...
>>
>> Dale
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
>> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion" <[hidden email]>
>> | Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2013 12:28:11 PM
>> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
>> |
>> | Hi Dale,
>> |
>> | Thanks for pulling the rope here.
>> |
>> | I made a benign change... did that do something?
>> | Mind that I noticed how the commit also showed a lot more changed
>> | lines than what I actually changed. Seems like a filetree issue.
>> |
>> | This was already quite some time ago. I will take a look soon to
>> | create a new pull request.
>> |
>> | ps: yes, we are using this version of Zinc in production and it's
>> | working very well. The failing tests are not harming us and we were
>> | already anticipating that we should bring the gemstone port up to
>> | speed with the current status in Pharo. hence...
>> |
>> | On 03 Jun 2013, at 21:43, Dale K. Henrichs
>> | <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> |
>> | > Johan,
>> | >
>> | > You have an existing pull request for Zinc. If you make a benign
>> | > change and do a new commit on your branch and then push that
>> | > commit to GitHub it will trigger a travisCI build ... it will make
>> | > a nice example of how pull requests and travis work together ...
>> | >
>> | > Dale
>> | >
>> | >
>> | > ----- Original Message -----
>> | > | From: "Dale K. Henrichs" <[hidden email]>
>> | > | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
>> | > | <[hidden email]>
>> | > | Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 12:05:19 PM
>> | > | Subject: GitHub and Zinc
>> | > |
>> | > | As you probably all know, I've spent the bulk of the last year or
>> | > | so
>> | > | working on GitHub, TravisCI, FileTree, Metacello and tODE. My
>> | > | primary motivation has been to improve the collaboration
>> | > | experience
>> | > | for GLASS.
>> | > |
>> | > | Recently I have had the opportunity to collaborate with
>> | > | Christophe
>> | > | Demarey on porting the Metacello Preview to Pharo2.0 leveraging
>> | > | the
>> | > | collaboration facilities available on GitHub and TravisCI. The
>> | > | effort has been very successful and I think it is time to start
>> | > | leveraging GitHub and TravisCI for GLASS development.
>> | > |
>> | > | John's bug report this morning makes me think that the Zinc
>> | > | project
>> | > | will be a good first step to working out the kinks in using
>> | > | GitHub/TravisCI.
>> | > |
>> | > | I have just now finished setting up the Zinc project to
>> | > | automatically
>> | > | run TravisCI builds for all commits/pull requests[1]. The tests
>> | > | are
>> | > | failing on both gemstone2.4 and gemstone3.1 branches, but I
>> | > | assume
>> | > | that folks are actually using Zinc in production and have either
>> | > | got
>> | > | fixes for some of the test failures, or the tests are failing in
>> | > | benign ways ...
>> | > |
>> | > | For gemstone2.4 the following tests are failing:
>> | > |
>> | > | **************************************************************************************
>> | > | Results for anArray( 'BaselineOfZinc') Test Suite
>> | > | 240 run, 232 passes, 4 expected defects, 4 failures, 0 errors, 0
>> | > | unexpected passes
>> | > | **************************************************************************************
>> | > | *** FAILURES *******************
>> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testCookiesForUrl'.
>> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testCookieAtForUrl'.
>> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testAdd'.
>> | > | ZnMagicCookieTests debug: #'testFromString'.
>> | > | **************************************************************************************
>> | > |
>> | > | For gemstone3.1 the same tests are failing along with a bunch of
>> | > | errors[2].
>> | > |
>> | > | Ken has a fork of gemstone3.1 and I am suspicious that his branch
>> | > | may
>> | > | have fixes for many of the gemstone3.1 issues/errors. Johan has a
>> | > | fork of gemstone2.4 with a fix for a particular test. We have
>> | > | Johns'
>> | > | bug report. We have new checkins from Sven that have yet to be
>> | > | integrated.
>> | > |
>> | > | The fork/pull request model on GitHub works very well for
>> | > | submitting
>> | > | updates for inclusion in the main repository:
>> | > |
>> | > |   - tests are run with TravisCI
>> | > |   - and the changes made in pull request can be reviewed with
>> | > |   comments
>> | > |
>> | > | So a green run combined with a clean code review, means that
>> | > | fixes
>> | > | can be merged into the release branch and folks can feel
>> | > | comfortable
>> | > | either using the branch directly or integrating into their own
>> | > | forks.
>> | > |
>> | > | Moving forward their are additional projects like porting
>> | > | Seaside3.1
>> | > | to GemStone that we can collaborate on. Paul and I have already
>> | > | started on the project, but haven't touched in the last couple of
>> | > | weeks[3]&[4]. Presumably there is also interest in getting
>> | > | Zodiac[4]
>> | > | ported to GemStone as well...
>> | > |
>> | > | The code is all being managed in the glassdb organization on
>> | > | GitHub
>> | > | and I can add GLASS developers to the organization so that I
>> | > | won't
>> | > | be the only person with the ability to approve pull requests ...
>> | > | getting me off the critical path for doing integration ..
>> | > |
>> | > | I'm not thinking that everyone will drop what they are doing and
>> | > | start work in Zinc (myself I'm preparing for a STIC talk next
>> | > | week
>> | > | so I'm not going to be able to do too much between now and then),
>> | > | but we can start talking about the mechanics and when folks find
>> | > | opportunities to contribute we'll have an idea how we want to
>> | > | proceed.
>> | > |
>> | > | Dale
>> | > |
>> | > |
>> | > | [1] https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc
>> | > | [2] https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc/jobs/7744348#L128
>> | > | [3] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside30
>> | > | [4] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside31
>> | > | [5] https://github.com/glassdb/zodiac
>> | > |
>> |
>> |
>

> I think it's the missing .travis.yml file ... the travis builds should be triggered whether or not the commit can be merged automatically ... another possibility is that the pull request was created before I enabled the travis builds, or ...
>
> We'll try a new pull request if the merge doesn't work...
>
> Dale
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion" <[hidden email]>
> | Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 6:20:56 AM
> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
> |
> | I think it is because the pull request could not be merged
> | automatically ?
> |
> | Ok... will look into this
> | As I said, it's already a few months old, so I need to update it
> |
> | On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:15, Johan Brichau <[hidden email]> wrote:
> |
> | > Dale,
> | >
> | > I did a change to the pull request but nothing happened.
> | >
> | > I have never used travis-CI, so what should I do more to trigger
> | > the build here?
> | >
> | > On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:05, "Dale K. Henrichs"
> | > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> | >
> | >> Johan,
> | >>
> | >> No nothing broken and I have not even looked at the commit ... I
> | >> just figured that a pull request on your part (or Ken's) will get
> | >> things started.
> | >>
> | >> We are all busy, but if we start leveraging github and travis-ci I
> | >> think we will be more efficient in managing contributions ...
> | >> folks can contribute a patch for a single test and the whole
> | >> community can track progress towards green tests ...
> | >>
> | >> Dale
> | >>
> | >> ----- Original Message -----
> | >> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
> | >> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
> | >> | <[hidden email]>
> | >> | Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2013 12:28:11 PM
> | >> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
> | >> |
> | >> | Hi Dale,
> | >> |
> | >> | Thanks for pulling the rope here.
> | >> |
> | >> | I made a benign change... did that do something?
> | >> | Mind that I noticed how the commit also showed a lot more
> | >> | changed
> | >> | lines than what I actually changed. Seems like a filetree issue.
> | >> |
> | >> | This was already quite some time ago. I will take a look soon to
> | >> | create a new pull request.
> | >> |
> | >> | ps: yes, we are using this version of Zinc in production and
> | >> | it's
> | >> | working very well. The failing tests are not harming us and we
> | >> | were
> | >> | already anticipating that we should bring the gemstone port up
> | >> | to
> | >> | speed with the current status in Pharo. hence...
> | >> |
> | >> | On 03 Jun 2013, at 21:43, Dale K. Henrichs
> | >> | <[hidden email]> wrote:
> | >> |
> | >> | > Johan,
> | >> | >
> | >> | > You have an existing pull request for Zinc. If you make a
> | >> | > benign
> | >> | > change and do a new commit on your branch and then push that
> | >> | > commit to GitHub it will trigger a travisCI build ... it will
> | >> | > make
> | >> | > a nice example of how pull requests and travis work together
> | >> | > ...
> | >> | >
> | >> | > Dale
> | >> | >
> | >> | >
> | >> | > ----- Original Message -----
> | >> | > | From: "Dale K. Henrichs" <[hidden email]>
> | >> | > | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
> | >> | > | <[hidden email]>
> | >> | > | Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 12:05:19 PM
> | >> | > | Subject: GitHub and Zinc
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | As you probably all know, I've spent the bulk of the last
> | >> | > | year or
> | >> | > | so
> | >> | > | working on GitHub, TravisCI, FileTree, Metacello and tODE.
> | >> | > | My
> | >> | > | primary motivation has been to improve the collaboration
> | >> | > | experience
> | >> | > | for GLASS.
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | Recently I have had the opportunity to collaborate with
> | >> | > | Christophe
> | >> | > | Demarey on porting the Metacello Preview to Pharo2.0
> | >> | > | leveraging
> | >> | > | the
> | >> | > | collaboration facilities available on GitHub and TravisCI.
> | >> | > | The
> | >> | > | effort has been very successful and I think it is time to
> | >> | > | start
> | >> | > | leveraging GitHub and TravisCI for GLASS development.
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | John's bug report this morning makes me think that the Zinc
> | >> | > | project
> | >> | > | will be a good first step to working out the kinks in using
> | >> | > | GitHub/TravisCI.
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | I have just now finished setting up the Zinc project to
> | >> | > | automatically
> | >> | > | run TravisCI builds for all commits/pull requests[1]. The
> | >> | > | tests
> | >> | > | are
> | >> | > | failing on both gemstone2.4 and gemstone3.1 branches, but I
> | >> | > | assume
> | >> | > | that folks are actually using Zinc in production and have
> | >> | > | either
> | >> | > | got
> | >> | > | fixes for some of the test failures, or the tests are
> | >> | > | failing in
> | >> | > | benign ways ...
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | For gemstone2.4 the following tests are failing:
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
> | >> | > | Results for anArray( 'BaselineOfZinc') Test Suite
> | >> | > | 240 run, 232 passes, 4 expected defects, 4 failures, 0
> | >> | > | errors, 0
> | >> | > | unexpected passes
> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
> | >> | > | *** FAILURES *******************
> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testCookiesForUrl'.
> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testCookieAtForUrl'.
> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testAdd'.
> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieTests debug: #'testFromString'.
> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | For gemstone3.1 the same tests are failing along with a
> | >> | > | bunch of
> | >> | > | errors[2].
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | Ken has a fork of gemstone3.1 and I am suspicious that his
> | >> | > | branch
> | >> | > | may
> | >> | > | have fixes for many of the gemstone3.1 issues/errors. Johan
> | >> | > | has a
> | >> | > | fork of gemstone2.4 with a fix for a particular test. We
> | >> | > | have
> | >> | > | Johns'
> | >> | > | bug report. We have new checkins from Sven that have yet to
> | >> | > | be
> | >> | > | integrated.
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | The fork/pull request model on GitHub works very well for
> | >> | > | submitting
> | >> | > | updates for inclusion in the main repository:
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > |   - tests are run with TravisCI
> | >> | > |   - and the changes made in pull request can be reviewed
> | >> | > |   with
> | >> | > |   comments
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | So a green run combined with a clean code review, means that
> | >> | > | fixes
> | >> | > | can be merged into the release branch and folks can feel
> | >> | > | comfortable
> | >> | > | either using the branch directly or integrating into their
> | >> | > | own
> | >> | > | forks.
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | Moving forward their are additional projects like porting
> | >> | > | Seaside3.1
> | >> | > | to GemStone that we can collaborate on. Paul and I have
> | >> | > | already
> | >> | > | started on the project, but haven't touched in the last
> | >> | > | couple of
> | >> | > | weeks[3]&[4]. Presumably there is also interest in getting
> | >> | > | Zodiac[4]
> | >> | > | ported to GemStone as well...
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | The code is all being managed in the glassdb organization on
> | >> | > | GitHub
> | >> | > | and I can add GLASS developers to the organization so that I
> | >> | > | won't
> | >> | > | be the only person with the ability to approve pull requests
> | >> | > | ...
> | >> | > | getting me off the critical path for doing integration ..
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | I'm not thinking that everyone will drop what they are doing
> | >> | > | and
> | >> | > | start work in Zinc (myself I'm preparing for a STIC talk
> | >> | > | next
> | >> | > | week
> | >> | > | so I'm not going to be able to do too much between now and
> | >> | > | then),
> | >> | > | but we can start talking about the mechanics and when folks
> | >> | > | find
> | >> | > | opportunities to contribute we'll have an idea how we want
> | >> | > | to
> | >> | > | proceed.
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | Dale
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | [1] https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc
> | >> | > | [2] https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc/jobs/7744348#L128
> | >> | > | [3] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside30
> | >> | > | [4] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside31
> | >> | > | [5] https://github.com/glassdb/zodiac
> | >> | > |
> | >> |
> | >> |
> | >
> |
> |

> I think it's the missing .travis.yml file ... the travis builds should be triggered whether or not the commit can be merged automatically ... another possibility is that the pull request was created before I enabled the travis builds, or ...
>
> We'll try a new pull request if the merge doesn't work...
>
> Dale
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion" <[hidden email]>
> | Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 6:20:56 AM
> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
> |
> | I think it is because the pull request could not be merged
> | automatically ?
> |
> | Ok... will look into this
> | As I said, it's already a few months old, so I need to update it
> |
> | On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:15, Johan Brichau <[hidden email]> wrote:
> |
> | > Dale,
> | >
> | > I did a change to the pull request but nothing happened.
> | >
> | > I have never used travis-CI, so what should I do more to trigger
> | > the build here?
> | >
> | > On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:05, "Dale K. Henrichs"
> | > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> | >
> | >> Johan,
> | >>
> | >> No nothing broken and I have not even looked at the commit ... I
> | >> just figured that a pull request on your part (or Ken's) will get
> | >> things started.
> | >>
> | >> We are all busy, but if we start leveraging github and travis-ci I
> | >> think we will be more efficient in managing contributions ...
> | >> folks can contribute a patch for a single test and the whole
> | >> community can track progress towards green tests ...
> | >>
> | >> Dale
> | >>
> | >> ----- Original Message -----
> | >> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
> | >> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
> | >> | <[hidden email]>
> | >> | Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2013 12:28:11 PM
> | >> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
> | >> |
> | >> | Hi Dale,
> | >> |
> | >> | Thanks for pulling the rope here.
> | >> |
> | >> | I made a benign change... did that do something?
> | >> | Mind that I noticed how the commit also showed a lot more
> | >> | changed
> | >> | lines than what I actually changed. Seems like a filetree issue.
> | >> |
> | >> | This was already quite some time ago. I will take a look soon to
> | >> | create a new pull request.
> | >> |
> | >> | ps: yes, we are using this version of Zinc in production and
> | >> | it's
> | >> | working very well. The failing tests are not harming us and we
> | >> | were
> | >> | already anticipating that we should bring the gemstone port up
> | >> | to
> | >> | speed with the current status in Pharo. hence...
> | >> |
> | >> | On 03 Jun 2013, at 21:43, Dale K. Henrichs
> | >> | <[hidden email]> wrote:
> | >> |
> | >> | > Johan,
> | >> | >
> | >> | > You have an existing pull request for Zinc. If you make a
> | >> | > benign
> | >> | > change and do a new commit on your branch and then push that
> | >> | > commit to GitHub it will trigger a travisCI build ... it will
> | >> | > make
> | >> | > a nice example of how pull requests and travis work together
> | >> | > ...
> | >> | >
> | >> | > Dale
> | >> | >
> | >> | >
> | >> | > ----- Original Message -----
> | >> | > | From: "Dale K. Henrichs" <[hidden email]>
> | >> | > | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
> | >> | > | <[hidden email]>
> | >> | > | Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 12:05:19 PM
> | >> | > | Subject: GitHub and Zinc
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | As you probably all know, I've spent the bulk of the last
> | >> | > | year or
> | >> | > | so
> | >> | > | working on GitHub, TravisCI, FileTree, Metacello and tODE.
> | >> | > | My
> | >> | > | primary motivation has been to improve the collaboration
> | >> | > | experience
> | >> | > | for GLASS.
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | Recently I have had the opportunity to collaborate with
> | >> | > | Christophe
> | >> | > | Demarey on porting the Metacello Preview to Pharo2.0
> | >> | > | leveraging
> | >> | > | the
> | >> | > | collaboration facilities available on GitHub and TravisCI.
> | >> | > | The
> | >> | > | effort has been very successful and I think it is time to
> | >> | > | start
> | >> | > | leveraging GitHub and TravisCI for GLASS development.
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | John's bug report this morning makes me think that the Zinc
> | >> | > | project
> | >> | > | will be a good first step to working out the kinks in using
> | >> | > | GitHub/TravisCI.
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | I have just now finished setting up the Zinc project to
> | >> | > | automatically
> | >> | > | run TravisCI builds for all commits/pull requests[1]. The
> | >> | > | tests
> | >> | > | are
> | >> | > | failing on both gemstone2.4 and gemstone3.1 branches, but I
> | >> | > | assume
> | >> | > | that folks are actually using Zinc in production and have
> | >> | > | either
> | >> | > | got
> | >> | > | fixes for some of the test failures, or the tests are
> | >> | > | failing in
> | >> | > | benign ways ...
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | For gemstone2.4 the following tests are failing:
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
> | >> | > | Results for anArray( 'BaselineOfZinc') Test Suite
> | >> | > | 240 run, 232 passes, 4 expected defects, 4 failures, 0
> | >> | > | errors, 0
> | >> | > | unexpected passes
> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
> | >> | > | *** FAILURES *******************
> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testCookiesForUrl'.
> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testCookieAtForUrl'.
> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testAdd'.
> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieTests debug: #'testFromString'.
> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | For gemstone3.1 the same tests are failing along with a
> | >> | > | bunch of
> | >> | > | errors[2].
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | Ken has a fork of gemstone3.1 and I am suspicious that his
> | >> | > | branch
> | >> | > | may
> | >> | > | have fixes for many of the gemstone3.1 issues/errors. Johan
> | >> | > | has a
> | >> | > | fork of gemstone2.4 with a fix for a particular test. We
> | >> | > | have
> | >> | > | Johns'
> | >> | > | bug report. We have new checkins from Sven that have yet to
> | >> | > | be
> | >> | > | integrated.
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | The fork/pull request model on GitHub works very well for
> | >> | > | submitting
> | >> | > | updates for inclusion in the main repository:
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > |   - tests are run with TravisCI
> | >> | > |   - and the changes made in pull request can be reviewed
> | >> | > |   with
> | >> | > |   comments
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | So a green run combined with a clean code review, means that
> | >> | > | fixes
> | >> | > | can be merged into the release branch and folks can feel
> | >> | > | comfortable
> | >> | > | either using the branch directly or integrating into their
> | >> | > | own
> | >> | > | forks.
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | Moving forward their are additional projects like porting
> | >> | > | Seaside3.1
> | >> | > | to GemStone that we can collaborate on. Paul and I have
> | >> | > | already
> | >> | > | started on the project, but haven't touched in the last
> | >> | > | couple of
> | >> | > | weeks[3]&[4]. Presumably there is also interest in getting
> | >> | > | Zodiac[4]
> | >> | > | ported to GemStone as well...
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | The code is all being managed in the glassdb organization on
> | >> | > | GitHub
> | >> | > | and I can add GLASS developers to the organization so that I
> | >> | > | won't
> | >> | > | be the only person with the ability to approve pull requests
> | >> | > | ...
> | >> | > | getting me off the critical path for doing integration ..
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | I'm not thinking that everyone will drop what they are doing
> | >> | > | and
> | >> | > | start work in Zinc (myself I'm preparing for a STIC talk
> | >> | > | next
> | >> | > | week
> | >> | > | so I'm not going to be able to do too much between now and
> | >> | > | then),
> | >> | > | but we can start talking about the mechanics and when folks
> | >> | > | find
> | >> | > | opportunities to contribute we'll have an idea how we want
> | >> | > | to
> | >> | > | proceed.
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | Dale
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | [1] https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc
> | >> | > | [2] https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc/jobs/7744348#L128
> | >> | > | [3] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside30
> | >> | > | [4] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside31
> | >> | > | [5] https://github.com/glassdb/zodiac
> | >> | > |
> | >> |
> | >> |
> | >
> |
> |

> Hi Dale,
>
> I finally got to updating my fork by fetching the upstream changes.
> Seems like travis got to work immediately.
>
> Really nice show case for working together. I like it!
>
> Johan
>
> On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:46, Dale K. Henrichs <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I think it's the missing .travis.yml file ... the travis builds should be triggered whether or not the commit can be merged automatically ... another possibility is that the pull request was created before I enabled the travis builds, or ...
>>
>> We'll try a new pull request if the merge doesn't work...
>>
>> Dale
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
>> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion" <[hidden email]>
>> | Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 6:20:56 AM
>> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
>> |
>> | I think it is because the pull request could not be merged
>> | automatically ?
>> |
>> | Ok... will look into this
>> | As I said, it's already a few months old, so I need to update it
>> |
>> | On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:15, Johan Brichau <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> |
>> | > Dale,
>> | >
>> | > I did a change to the pull request but nothing happened.
>> | >
>> | > I have never used travis-CI, so what should I do more to trigger
>> | > the build here?
>> | >
>> | > On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:05, "Dale K. Henrichs"
>> | > <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> | >
>> | >> Johan,
>> | >>
>> | >> No nothing broken and I have not even looked at the commit ... I
>> | >> just figured that a pull request on your part (or Ken's) will get
>> | >> things started.
>> | >>
>> | >> We are all busy, but if we start leveraging github and travis-ci I
>> | >> think we will be more efficient in managing contributions ...
>> | >> folks can contribute a patch for a single test and the whole
>> | >> community can track progress towards green tests ...
>> | >>
>> | >> Dale
>> | >>
>> | >> ----- Original Message -----
>> | >> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
>> | >> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
>> | >> | <[hidden email]>
>> | >> | Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2013 12:28:11 PM
>> | >> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
>> | >> |
>> | >> | Hi Dale,
>> | >> |
>> | >> | Thanks for pulling the rope here.
>> | >> |
>> | >> | I made a benign change... did that do something?
>> | >> | Mind that I noticed how the commit also showed a lot more
>> | >> | changed
>> | >> | lines than what I actually changed. Seems like a filetree issue.
>> | >> |
>> | >> | This was already quite some time ago. I will take a look soon to
>> | >> | create a new pull request.
>> | >> |
>> | >> | ps: yes, we are using this version of Zinc in production and
>> | >> | it's
>> | >> | working very well. The failing tests are not harming us and we
>> | >> | were
>> | >> | already anticipating that we should bring the gemstone port up
>> | >> | to
>> | >> | speed with the current status in Pharo. hence...
>> | >> |
>> | >> | On 03 Jun 2013, at 21:43, Dale K. Henrichs
>> | >> | <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> | >> |
>> | >> | > Johan,
>> | >> | >
>> | >> | > You have an existing pull request for Zinc. If you make a
>> | >> | > benign
>> | >> | > change and do a new commit on your branch and then push that
>> | >> | > commit to GitHub it will trigger a travisCI build ... it will
>> | >> | > make
>> | >> | > a nice example of how pull requests and travis work together
>> | >> | > ...
>> | >> | >
>> | >> | > Dale
>> | >> | >
>> | >> | >
>> | >> | > ----- Original Message -----
>> | >> | > | From: "Dale K. Henrichs" <[hidden email]>
>> | >> | > | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
>> | >> | > | <[hidden email]>
>> | >> | > | Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 12:05:19 PM
>> | >> | > | Subject: GitHub and Zinc
>> | >> | > |
>> | >> | > | As you probably all know, I've spent the bulk of the last
>> | >> | > | year or
>> | >> | > | so
>> | >> | > | working on GitHub, TravisCI, FileTree, Metacello and tODE.
>> | >> | > | My
>> | >> | > | primary motivation has been to improve the collaboration
>> | >> | > | experience
>> | >> | > | for GLASS.
>> | >> | > |
>> | >> | > | Recently I have had the opportunity to collaborate with
>> | >> | > | Christophe
>> | >> | > | Demarey on porting the Metacello Preview to Pharo2.0
>> | >> | > | leveraging
>> | >> | > | the
>> | >> | > | collaboration facilities available on GitHub and TravisCI.
>> | >> | > | The
>> | >> | > | effort has been very successful and I think it is time to
>> | >> | > | start
>> | >> | > | leveraging GitHub and TravisCI for GLASS development.
>> | >> | > |
>> | >> | > | John's bug report this morning makes me think that the Zinc
>> | >> | > | project
>> | >> | > | will be a good first step to working out the kinks in using
>> | >> | > | GitHub/TravisCI.
>> | >> | > |
>> | >> | > | I have just now finished setting up the Zinc project to
>> | >> | > | automatically
>> | >> | > | run TravisCI builds for all commits/pull requests[1]. The
>> | >> | > | tests
>> | >> | > | are
>> | >> | > | failing on both gemstone2.4 and gemstone3.1 branches, but I
>> | >> | > | assume
>> | >> | > | that folks are actually using Zinc in production and have
>> | >> | > | either
>> | >> | > | got
>> | >> | > | fixes for some of the test failures, or the tests are
>> | >> | > | failing in
>> | >> | > | benign ways ...
>> | >> | > |
>> | >> | > | For gemstone2.4 the following tests are failing:
>> | >> | > |
>> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
>> | >> | > | Results for anArray( 'BaselineOfZinc') Test Suite
>> | >> | > | 240 run, 232 passes, 4 expected defects, 4 failures, 0
>> | >> | > | errors, 0
>> | >> | > | unexpected passes
>> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
>> | >> | > | *** FAILURES *******************
>> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testCookiesForUrl'.
>> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testCookieAtForUrl'.
>> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testAdd'.
>> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieTests debug: #'testFromString'.
>> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
>> | >> | > |
>> | >> | > | For gemstone3.1 the same tests are failing along with a
>> | >> | > | bunch of
>> | >> | > | errors[2].
>> | >> | > |
>> | >> | > | Ken has a fork of gemstone3.1 and I am suspicious that his
>> | >> | > | branch
>> | >> | > | may
>> | >> | > | have fixes for many of the gemstone3.1 issues/errors. Johan
>> | >> | > | has a
>> | >> | > | fork of gemstone2.4 with a fix for a particular test. We
>> | >> | > | have
>> | >> | > | Johns'
>> | >> | > | bug report. We have new checkins from Sven that have yet to
>> | >> | > | be
>> | >> | > | integrated.
>> | >> | > |
>> | >> | > | The fork/pull request model on GitHub works very well for
>> | >> | > | submitting
>> | >> | > | updates for inclusion in the main repository:
>> | >> | > |
>> | >> | > |   - tests are run with TravisCI
>> | >> | > |   - and the changes made in pull request can be reviewed
>> | >> | > |   with
>> | >> | > |   comments
>> | >> | > |
>> | >> | > | So a green run combined with a clean code review, means that
>> | >> | > | fixes
>> | >> | > | can be merged into the release branch and folks can feel
>> | >> | > | comfortable
>> | >> | > | either using the branch directly or integrating into their
>> | >> | > | own
>> | >> | > | forks.
>> | >> | > |
>> | >> | > | Moving forward their are additional projects like porting
>> | >> | > | Seaside3.1
>> | >> | > | to GemStone that we can collaborate on. Paul and I have
>> | >> | > | already
>> | >> | > | started on the project, but haven't touched in the last
>> | >> | > | couple of
>> | >> | > | weeks[3]&[4]. Presumably there is also interest in getting
>> | >> | > | Zodiac[4]
>> | >> | > | ported to GemStone as well...
>> | >> | > |
>> | >> | > | The code is all being managed in the glassdb organization on
>> | >> | > | GitHub
>> | >> | > | and I can add GLASS developers to the organization so that I
>> | >> | > | won't
>> | >> | > | be the only person with the ability to approve pull requests
>> | >> | > | ...
>> | >> | > | getting me off the critical path for doing integration ..
>> | >> | > |
>> | >> | > | I'm not thinking that everyone will drop what they are doing
>> | >> | > | and
>> | >> | > | start work in Zinc (myself I'm preparing for a STIC talk
>> | >> | > | next
>> | >> | > | week
>> | >> | > | so I'm not going to be able to do too much between now and
>> | >> | > | then),
>> | >> | > | but we can start talking about the mechanics and when folks
>> | >> | > | find
>> | >> | > | opportunities to contribute we'll have an idea how we want
>> | >> | > | to
>> | >> | > | proceed.
>> | >> | > |
>> | >> | > | Dale
>> | >> | > |
>> | >> | > |
>> | >> | > | [1] https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc
>> | >> | > | [2] https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc/jobs/7744348#L128
>> | >> | > | [3] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside30
>> | >> | > | [4] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside31
>> | >> | > | [5] https://github.com/glassdb/zodiac
>> | >> | > |
>> | >> |
>> | >> |
>> | >
>> |
>> |
>

> Johan,
>
> Yep that's the model ... and now you see why I wasn't so fast to merge Sven's changes at the time he published them ... If I recall correctly, Sven renamed a bunch of packages (it is possible that he did more than that as well?) ....
>
> If you push your work up to github (perhaps on a branch off of master) I can look at the diffs and help plan a course of action (inline comments).
>
> It may turn out to be easier to backport the GemStone specific changes than to merge the new work back into GemStone ...
>
> Dale
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion" <[hidden email]>
> | Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 11:36:15 AM
> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
> |
> | So, now that I am this far, I think it's worth doing something more
> | substantial than my existing pull request (which, strangely, was the
> | only failing test in my case -- different from travis build?)
> |
> | Since the version difference of Zinc between Pharo and GLASS is a bit
> | of a hurdle, I thought it would be good to pull in Sven's latest
> | changes. It's not the latest version in Pharo but it's a good step.
> | How does one go about this? Is there a specific workflow that works
> | well for Smalltalk projects and are there conventions to be
> | followed?
> |
> | I fetched Sven's repository and merged it into my local fork of the
> | master branch. I am correct that glassdb/zinc/master is supposed to
> | be the copy of the svenc/zinc/master ?
> | Next, I merged the master branch into the gemstone2.4 branch and,
> | obviously, merge conflict hell broke loose. Now looking at those...
> |
> | All of this only in my local repo, of course.
> | Is this how it's supposed to work?
> |
> | Johan
> |
> | On 14 Jun 2013, at 20:34, Johan Brichau <[hidden email]> wrote:
> |
> | > Hi Dale,
> | >
> | > I finally got to updating my fork by fetching the upstream changes.
> | > Seems like travis got to work immediately.
> | >
> | > Really nice show case for working together. I like it!
> | >
> | > Johan
> | >
> | > On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:46, Dale K. Henrichs
> | > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> | >
> | >> I think it's the missing .travis.yml file ... the travis builds
> | >> should be triggered whether or not the commit can be merged
> | >> automatically ... another possibility is that the pull request
> | >> was created before I enabled the travis builds, or ...
> | >>
> | >> We'll try a new pull request if the merge doesn't work...
> | >>
> | >> Dale
> | >>
> | >> ----- Original Message -----
> | >> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
> | >> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
> | >> | <[hidden email]>
> | >> | Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 6:20:56 AM
> | >> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
> | >> |
> | >> | I think it is because the pull request could not be merged
> | >> | automatically ?
> | >> |
> | >> | Ok... will look into this
> | >> | As I said, it's already a few months old, so I need to update it
> | >> |
> | >> | On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:15, Johan Brichau <[hidden email]>
> | >> | wrote:
> | >> |
> | >> | > Dale,
> | >> | >
> | >> | > I did a change to the pull request but nothing happened.
> | >> | >
> | >> | > I have never used travis-CI, so what should I do more to
> | >> | > trigger
> | >> | > the build here?
> | >> | >
> | >> | > On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:05, "Dale K. Henrichs"
> | >> | > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> | >> | >
> | >> | >> Johan,
> | >> | >>
> | >> | >> No nothing broken and I have not even looked at the commit
> | >> | >> ... I
> | >> | >> just figured that a pull request on your part (or Ken's) will
> | >> | >> get
> | >> | >> things started.
> | >> | >>
> | >> | >> We are all busy, but if we start leveraging github and
> | >> | >> travis-ci I
> | >> | >> think we will be more efficient in managing contributions ...
> | >> | >> folks can contribute a patch for a single test and the whole
> | >> | >> community can track progress towards green tests ...
> | >> | >>
> | >> | >> Dale
> | >> | >>
> | >> | >> ----- Original Message -----
> | >> | >> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
> | >> | >> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
> | >> | >> | <[hidden email]>
> | >> | >> | Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2013 12:28:11 PM
> | >> | >> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
> | >> | >> |
> | >> | >> | Hi Dale,
> | >> | >> |
> | >> | >> | Thanks for pulling the rope here.
> | >> | >> |
> | >> | >> | I made a benign change... did that do something?
> | >> | >> | Mind that I noticed how the commit also showed a lot more
> | >> | >> | changed
> | >> | >> | lines than what I actually changed. Seems like a filetree
> | >> | >> | issue.
> | >> | >> |
> | >> | >> | This was already quite some time ago. I will take a look
> | >> | >> | soon to
> | >> | >> | create a new pull request.
> | >> | >> |
> | >> | >> | ps: yes, we are using this version of Zinc in production
> | >> | >> | and
> | >> | >> | it's
> | >> | >> | working very well. The failing tests are not harming us and
> | >> | >> | we
> | >> | >> | were
> | >> | >> | already anticipating that we should bring the gemstone port
> | >> | >> | up
> | >> | >> | to
> | >> | >> | speed with the current status in Pharo. hence...
> | >> | >> |
> | >> | >> | On 03 Jun 2013, at 21:43, Dale K. Henrichs
> | >> | >> | <[hidden email]> wrote:
> | >> | >> |
> | >> | >> | > Johan,
> | >> | >> | >
> | >> | >> | > You have an existing pull request for Zinc. If you make a
> | >> | >> | > benign
> | >> | >> | > change and do a new commit on your branch and then push
> | >> | >> | > that
> | >> | >> | > commit to GitHub it will trigger a travisCI build ... it
> | >> | >> | > will
> | >> | >> | > make
> | >> | >> | > a nice example of how pull requests and travis work
> | >> | >> | > together
> | >> | >> | > ...
> | >> | >> | >
> | >> | >> | > Dale
> | >> | >> | >
> | >> | >> | >
> | >> | >> | > ----- Original Message -----
> | >> | >> | > | From: "Dale K. Henrichs"
> | >> | >> | > | <[hidden email]>
> | >> | >> | > | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
> | >> | >> | > | <[hidden email]>
> | >> | >> | > | Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 12:05:19 PM
> | >> | >> | > | Subject: GitHub and Zinc
> | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | >> | > | As you probably all know, I've spent the bulk of the
> | >> | >> | > | last
> | >> | >> | > | year or
> | >> | >> | > | so
> | >> | >> | > | working on GitHub, TravisCI, FileTree, Metacello and
> | >> | >> | > | tODE.
> | >> | >> | > | My
> | >> | >> | > | primary motivation has been to improve the
> | >> | >> | > | collaboration
> | >> | >> | > | experience
> | >> | >> | > | for GLASS.
> | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | >> | > | Recently I have had the opportunity to collaborate with
> | >> | >> | > | Christophe
> | >> | >> | > | Demarey on porting the Metacello Preview to Pharo2.0
> | >> | >> | > | leveraging
> | >> | >> | > | the
> | >> | >> | > | collaboration facilities available on GitHub and
> | >> | >> | > | TravisCI.
> | >> | >> | > | The
> | >> | >> | > | effort has been very successful and I think it is time
> | >> | >> | > | to
> | >> | >> | > | start
> | >> | >> | > | leveraging GitHub and TravisCI for GLASS development.
> | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | >> | > | John's bug report this morning makes me think that the
> | >> | >> | > | Zinc
> | >> | >> | > | project
> | >> | >> | > | will be a good first step to working out the kinks in
> | >> | >> | > | using
> | >> | >> | > | GitHub/TravisCI.
> | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | >> | > | I have just now finished setting up the Zinc project to
> | >> | >> | > | automatically
> | >> | >> | > | run TravisCI builds for all commits/pull requests[1].
> | >> | >> | > | The
> | >> | >> | > | tests
> | >> | >> | > | are
> | >> | >> | > | failing on both gemstone2.4 and gemstone3.1 branches,
> | >> | >> | > | but I
> | >> | >> | > | assume
> | >> | >> | > | that folks are actually using Zinc in production and
> | >> | >> | > | have
> | >> | >> | > | either
> | >> | >> | > | got
> | >> | >> | > | fixes for some of the test failures, or the tests are
> | >> | >> | > | failing in
> | >> | >> | > | benign ways ...
> | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | >> | > | For gemstone2.4 the following tests are failing:
> | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
> | >> | >> | > | Results for anArray( 'BaselineOfZinc') Test Suite
> | >> | >> | > | 240 run, 232 passes, 4 expected defects, 4 failures, 0
> | >> | >> | > | errors, 0
> | >> | >> | > | unexpected passes
> | >> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
> | >> | >> | > | *** FAILURES *******************
> | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testCookiesForUrl'.
> | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testCookieAtForUrl'.
> | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testAdd'.
> | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieTests debug: #'testFromString'.
> | >> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
> | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | >> | > | For gemstone3.1 the same tests are failing along with a
> | >> | >> | > | bunch of
> | >> | >> | > | errors[2].
> | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | >> | > | Ken has a fork of gemstone3.1 and I am suspicious that
> | >> | >> | > | his
> | >> | >> | > | branch
> | >> | >> | > | may
> | >> | >> | > | have fixes for many of the gemstone3.1 issues/errors.
> | >> | >> | > | Johan
> | >> | >> | > | has a
> | >> | >> | > | fork of gemstone2.4 with a fix for a particular test.
> | >> | >> | > | We
> | >> | >> | > | have
> | >> | >> | > | Johns'
> | >> | >> | > | bug report. We have new checkins from Sven that have
> | >> | >> | > | yet to
> | >> | >> | > | be
> | >> | >> | > | integrated.
> | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | >> | > | The fork/pull request model on GitHub works very well
> | >> | >> | > | for
> | >> | >> | > | submitting
> | >> | >> | > | updates for inclusion in the main repository:
> | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | >> | > |   - tests are run with TravisCI
> | >> | >> | > |   - and the changes made in pull request can be
> | >> | >> | > |   reviewed
> | >> | >> | > |   with
> | >> | >> | > |   comments
> | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | >> | > | So a green run combined with a clean code review, means
> | >> | >> | > | that
> | >> | >> | > | fixes
> | >> | >> | > | can be merged into the release branch and folks can
> | >> | >> | > | feel
> | >> | >> | > | comfortable
> | >> | >> | > | either using the branch directly or integrating into
> | >> | >> | > | their
> | >> | >> | > | own
> | >> | >> | > | forks.
> | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | >> | > | Moving forward their are additional projects like
> | >> | >> | > | porting
> | >> | >> | > | Seaside3.1
> | >> | >> | > | to GemStone that we can collaborate on. Paul and I have
> | >> | >> | > | already
> | >> | >> | > | started on the project, but haven't touched in the last
> | >> | >> | > | couple of
> | >> | >> | > | weeks[3]&[4]. Presumably there is also interest in
> | >> | >> | > | getting
> | >> | >> | > | Zodiac[4]
> | >> | >> | > | ported to GemStone as well...
> | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | >> | > | The code is all being managed in the glassdb
> | >> | >> | > | organization on
> | >> | >> | > | GitHub
> | >> | >> | > | and I can add GLASS developers to the organization so
> | >> | >> | > | that I
> | >> | >> | > | won't
> | >> | >> | > | be the only person with the ability to approve pull
> | >> | >> | > | requests
> | >> | >> | > | ...
> | >> | >> | > | getting me off the critical path for doing integration
> | >> | >> | > | ..
> | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | >> | > | I'm not thinking that everyone will drop what they are
> | >> | >> | > | doing
> | >> | >> | > | and
> | >> | >> | > | start work in Zinc (myself I'm preparing for a STIC
> | >> | >> | > | talk
> | >> | >> | > | next
> | >> | >> | > | week
> | >> | >> | > | so I'm not going to be able to do too much between now
> | >> | >> | > | and
> | >> | >> | > | then),
> | >> | >> | > | but we can start talking about the mechanics and when
> | >> | >> | > | folks
> | >> | >> | > | find
> | >> | >> | > | opportunities to contribute we'll have an idea how we
> | >> | >> | > | want
> | >> | >> | > | to
> | >> | >> | > | proceed.
> | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | >> | > | Dale
> | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | >> | > | [1] https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc
> | >> | >> | > | [2]
> | >> | >> | > | https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc/jobs/7744348#L128
> | >> | >> | > | [3] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside30
> | >> | >> | > | [4] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside31
> | >> | >> | > | [5] https://github.com/glassdb/zodiac
> | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | >> |
> | >> | >> |
> | >> | >
> | >> |
> | >> |
> | >
> |
> |

> I haven't actually looked at the merge results ... Sven mentioned that he had done a bunch of package renames ... the package renames _should_ end up handled by git as a file rename and not a conflict ... when you mentioned a lot of changes, I just assumed the worst ...
>
> Glad to hear that there are mostly benign changes ... the dang newlines are a persistent problem that I need to figure out (for GemStone) ... I'm pretty sure that there were package renames, so the BaselineOf will probably need to be changed ... also look for "orhpaned methods" (methods that were added for GemStone and left behind by the package rename ...
>
> If you are making good progress then I don't need to look until you get down to the end:)
>
> Dale
> ----- Original Message -----
> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion" <[hidden email]>
> | Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 12:21:36 PM
> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
> |
> | Dale,
> |
> | Just to be sure: I used git merge to merge the branches and I am now
> | working my way through the conflicts. They mostly seem to be the
> | missing newline at the end of methods and the methodProperties.json.
> | If you mention there were a lot of real conflicting changes, I am
> | suspicious if git merge is really giving me a good end-result here.
> |
> | Now that I come to think of it... git merge is not going to signal me
> | if the same method was changed, like monticello does. So: are you
> | using monticello merge over filetree repositories or are you using
> | git merge to do this kind of work?
> |
> | Johan
> |
> | On 15 Jun 2013, at 20:59, "Dale K. Henrichs"
> | <[hidden email]> wrote:
> |
> | > Johan,
> | >
> | > Yep that's the model ... and now you see why I wasn't so fast to
> | > merge Sven's changes at the time he published them ... If I recall
> | > correctly, Sven renamed a bunch of packages (it is possible that
> | > he did more than that as well?) ....
> | >
> | > If you push your work up to github (perhaps on a branch off of
> | > master) I can look at the diffs and help plan a course of action
> | > (inline comments).
> | >
> | > It may turn out to be easier to backport the GemStone specific
> | > changes than to merge the new work back into GemStone ...
> | >
> | > Dale
> | >
> | > ----- Original Message -----
> | > | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
> | > | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
> | > | <[hidden email]>
> | > | Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 11:36:15 AM
> | > | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
> | > |
> | > | So, now that I am this far, I think it's worth doing something
> | > | more
> | > | substantial than my existing pull request (which, strangely, was
> | > | the
> | > | only failing test in my case -- different from travis build?)
> | > |
> | > | Since the version difference of Zinc between Pharo and GLASS is a
> | > | bit
> | > | of a hurdle, I thought it would be good to pull in Sven's latest
> | > | changes. It's not the latest version in Pharo but it's a good
> | > | step.
> | > | How does one go about this? Is there a specific workflow that
> | > | works
> | > | well for Smalltalk projects and are there conventions to be
> | > | followed?
> | > |
> | > | I fetched Sven's repository and merged it into my local fork of
> | > | the
> | > | master branch. I am correct that glassdb/zinc/master is supposed
> | > | to
> | > | be the copy of the svenc/zinc/master ?
> | > | Next, I merged the master branch into the gemstone2.4 branch and,
> | > | obviously, merge conflict hell broke loose. Now looking at
> | > | those...
> | > |
> | > | All of this only in my local repo, of course.
> | > | Is this how it's supposed to work?
> | > |
> | > | Johan
> | > |
> | > | On 14 Jun 2013, at 20:34, Johan Brichau <[hidden email]> wrote:
> | > |
> | > | > Hi Dale,
> | > | >
> | > | > I finally got to updating my fork by fetching the upstream
> | > | > changes.
> | > | > Seems like travis got to work immediately.
> | > | >
> | > | > Really nice show case for working together. I like it!
> | > | >
> | > | > Johan
> | > | >
> | > | > On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:46, Dale K. Henrichs
> | > | > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> | > | >
> | > | >> I think it's the missing .travis.yml file ... the travis
> | > | >> builds
> | > | >> should be triggered whether or not the commit can be merged
> | > | >> automatically ... another possibility is that the pull request
> | > | >> was created before I enabled the travis builds, or ...
> | > | >>
> | > | >> We'll try a new pull request if the merge doesn't work...
> | > | >>
> | > | >> Dale
> | > | >>
> | > | >> ----- Original Message -----
> | > | >> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
> | > | >> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
> | > | >> | <[hidden email]>
> | > | >> | Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 6:20:56 AM
> | > | >> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
> | > | >> |
> | > | >> | I think it is because the pull request could not be merged
> | > | >> | automatically ?
> | > | >> |
> | > | >> | Ok... will look into this
> | > | >> | As I said, it's already a few months old, so I need to
> | > | >> | update it
> | > | >> |
> | > | >> | On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:15, Johan Brichau <[hidden email]>
> | > | >> | wrote:
> | > | >> |
> | > | >> | > Dale,
> | > | >> | >
> | > | >> | > I did a change to the pull request but nothing happened.
> | > | >> | >
> | > | >> | > I have never used travis-CI, so what should I do more to
> | > | >> | > trigger
> | > | >> | > the build here?
> | > | >> | >
> | > | >> | > On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:05, "Dale K. Henrichs"
> | > | >> | > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> | > | >> | >
> | > | >> | >> Johan,
> | > | >> | >>
> | > | >> | >> No nothing broken and I have not even looked at the
> | > | >> | >> commit
> | > | >> | >> ... I
> | > | >> | >> just figured that a pull request on your part (or Ken's)
> | > | >> | >> will
> | > | >> | >> get
> | > | >> | >> things started.
> | > | >> | >>
> | > | >> | >> We are all busy, but if we start leveraging github and
> | > | >> | >> travis-ci I
> | > | >> | >> think we will be more efficient in managing contributions
> | > | >> | >> ...
> | > | >> | >> folks can contribute a patch for a single test and the
> | > | >> | >> whole
> | > | >> | >> community can track progress towards green tests ...
> | > | >> | >>
> | > | >> | >> Dale
> | > | >> | >>
> | > | >> | >> ----- Original Message -----
> | > | >> | >> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
> | > | >> | >> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
> | > | >> | >> | <[hidden email]>
> | > | >> | >> | Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2013 12:28:11 PM
> | > | >> | >> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
> | > | >> | >> |
> | > | >> | >> | Hi Dale,
> | > | >> | >> |
> | > | >> | >> | Thanks for pulling the rope here.
> | > | >> | >> |
> | > | >> | >> | I made a benign change... did that do something?
> | > | >> | >> | Mind that I noticed how the commit also showed a lot
> | > | >> | >> | more
> | > | >> | >> | changed
> | > | >> | >> | lines than what I actually changed. Seems like a
> | > | >> | >> | filetree
> | > | >> | >> | issue.
> | > | >> | >> |
> | > | >> | >> | This was already quite some time ago. I will take a
> | > | >> | >> | look
> | > | >> | >> | soon to
> | > | >> | >> | create a new pull request.
> | > | >> | >> |
> | > | >> | >> | ps: yes, we are using this version of Zinc in
> | > | >> | >> | production
> | > | >> | >> | and
> | > | >> | >> | it's
> | > | >> | >> | working very well. The failing tests are not harming us
> | > | >> | >> | and
> | > | >> | >> | we
> | > | >> | >> | were
> | > | >> | >> | already anticipating that we should bring the gemstone
> | > | >> | >> | port
> | > | >> | >> | up
> | > | >> | >> | to
> | > | >> | >> | speed with the current status in Pharo. hence...
> | > | >> | >> |
> | > | >> | >> | On 03 Jun 2013, at 21:43, Dale K. Henrichs
> | > | >> | >> | <[hidden email]> wrote:
> | > | >> | >> |
> | > | >> | >> | > Johan,
> | > | >> | >> | >
> | > | >> | >> | > You have an existing pull request for Zinc. If you
> | > | >> | >> | > make a
> | > | >> | >> | > benign
> | > | >> | >> | > change and do a new commit on your branch and then
> | > | >> | >> | > push
> | > | >> | >> | > that
> | > | >> | >> | > commit to GitHub it will trigger a travisCI build ...
> | > | >> | >> | > it
> | > | >> | >> | > will
> | > | >> | >> | > make
> | > | >> | >> | > a nice example of how pull requests and travis work
> | > | >> | >> | > together
> | > | >> | >> | > ...
> | > | >> | >> | >
> | > | >> | >> | > Dale
> | > | >> | >> | >
> | > | >> | >> | >
> | > | >> | >> | > ----- Original Message -----
> | > | >> | >> | > | From: "Dale K. Henrichs"
> | > | >> | >> | > | <[hidden email]>
> | > | >> | >> | > | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
> | > | >> | >> | > | <[hidden email]>
> | > | >> | >> | > | Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 12:05:19 PM
> | > | >> | >> | > | Subject: GitHub and Zinc
> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | > | >> | >> | > | As you probably all know, I've spent the bulk of
> | > | >> | >> | > | the
> | > | >> | >> | > | last
> | > | >> | >> | > | year or
> | > | >> | >> | > | so
> | > | >> | >> | > | working on GitHub, TravisCI, FileTree, Metacello
> | > | >> | >> | > | and
> | > | >> | >> | > | tODE.
> | > | >> | >> | > | My
> | > | >> | >> | > | primary motivation has been to improve the
> | > | >> | >> | > | collaboration
> | > | >> | >> | > | experience
> | > | >> | >> | > | for GLASS.
> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | > | >> | >> | > | Recently I have had the opportunity to collaborate
> | > | >> | >> | > | with
> | > | >> | >> | > | Christophe
> | > | >> | >> | > | Demarey on porting the Metacello Preview to
> | > | >> | >> | > | Pharo2.0
> | > | >> | >> | > | leveraging
> | > | >> | >> | > | the
> | > | >> | >> | > | collaboration facilities available on GitHub and
> | > | >> | >> | > | TravisCI.
> | > | >> | >> | > | The
> | > | >> | >> | > | effort has been very successful and I think it is
> | > | >> | >> | > | time
> | > | >> | >> | > | to
> | > | >> | >> | > | start
> | > | >> | >> | > | leveraging GitHub and TravisCI for GLASS
> | > | >> | >> | > | development.
> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | > | >> | >> | > | John's bug report this morning makes me think that
> | > | >> | >> | > | the
> | > | >> | >> | > | Zinc
> | > | >> | >> | > | project
> | > | >> | >> | > | will be a good first step to working out the kinks
> | > | >> | >> | > | in
> | > | >> | >> | > | using
> | > | >> | >> | > | GitHub/TravisCI.
> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | > | >> | >> | > | I have just now finished setting up the Zinc
> | > | >> | >> | > | project to
> | > | >> | >> | > | automatically
> | > | >> | >> | > | run TravisCI builds for all commits/pull
> | > | >> | >> | > | requests[1].
> | > | >> | >> | > | The
> | > | >> | >> | > | tests
> | > | >> | >> | > | are
> | > | >> | >> | > | failing on both gemstone2.4 and gemstone3.1
> | > | >> | >> | > | branches,
> | > | >> | >> | > | but I
> | > | >> | >> | > | assume
> | > | >> | >> | > | that folks are actually using Zinc in production
> | > | >> | >> | > | and
> | > | >> | >> | > | have
> | > | >> | >> | > | either
> | > | >> | >> | > | got
> | > | >> | >> | > | fixes for some of the test failures, or the tests
> | > | >> | >> | > | are
> | > | >> | >> | > | failing in
> | > | >> | >> | > | benign ways ...
> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | > | >> | >> | > | For gemstone2.4 the following tests are failing:
> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | > | >> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
> | > | >> | >> | > | Results for anArray( 'BaselineOfZinc') Test Suite
> | > | >> | >> | > | 240 run, 232 passes, 4 expected defects, 4
> | > | >> | >> | > | failures, 0
> | > | >> | >> | > | errors, 0
> | > | >> | >> | > | unexpected passes
> | > | >> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
> | > | >> | >> | > | *** FAILURES *******************
> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testCookiesForUrl'.
> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug:
> | > | >> | >> | > | #'testCookieAtForUrl'.
> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testAdd'.
> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieTests debug: #'testFromString'.
> | > | >> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | > | >> | >> | > | For gemstone3.1 the same tests are failing along
> | > | >> | >> | > | with a
> | > | >> | >> | > | bunch of
> | > | >> | >> | > | errors[2].
> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | > | >> | >> | > | Ken has a fork of gemstone3.1 and I am suspicious
> | > | >> | >> | > | that
> | > | >> | >> | > | his
> | > | >> | >> | > | branch
> | > | >> | >> | > | may
> | > | >> | >> | > | have fixes for many of the gemstone3.1
> | > | >> | >> | > | issues/errors.
> | > | >> | >> | > | Johan
> | > | >> | >> | > | has a
> | > | >> | >> | > | fork of gemstone2.4 with a fix for a particular
> | > | >> | >> | > | test.
> | > | >> | >> | > | We
> | > | >> | >> | > | have
> | > | >> | >> | > | Johns'
> | > | >> | >> | > | bug report. We have new checkins from Sven that
> | > | >> | >> | > | have
> | > | >> | >> | > | yet to
> | > | >> | >> | > | be
> | > | >> | >> | > | integrated.
> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | > | >> | >> | > | The fork/pull request model on GitHub works very
> | > | >> | >> | > | well
> | > | >> | >> | > | for
> | > | >> | >> | > | submitting
> | > | >> | >> | > | updates for inclusion in the main repository:
> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | > | >> | >> | > |   - tests are run with TravisCI
> | > | >> | >> | > |   - and the changes made in pull request can be
> | > | >> | >> | > |   reviewed
> | > | >> | >> | > |   with
> | > | >> | >> | > |   comments
> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | > | >> | >> | > | So a green run combined with a clean code review,
> | > | >> | >> | > | means
> | > | >> | >> | > | that
> | > | >> | >> | > | fixes
> | > | >> | >> | > | can be merged into the release branch and folks can
> | > | >> | >> | > | feel
> | > | >> | >> | > | comfortable
> | > | >> | >> | > | either using the branch directly or integrating
> | > | >> | >> | > | into
> | > | >> | >> | > | their
> | > | >> | >> | > | own
> | > | >> | >> | > | forks.
> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | > | >> | >> | > | Moving forward their are additional projects like
> | > | >> | >> | > | porting
> | > | >> | >> | > | Seaside3.1
> | > | >> | >> | > | to GemStone that we can collaborate on. Paul and I
> | > | >> | >> | > | have
> | > | >> | >> | > | already
> | > | >> | >> | > | started on the project, but haven't touched in the
> | > | >> | >> | > | last
> | > | >> | >> | > | couple of
> | > | >> | >> | > | weeks[3]&[4]. Presumably there is also interest in
> | > | >> | >> | > | getting
> | > | >> | >> | > | Zodiac[4]
> | > | >> | >> | > | ported to GemStone as well...
> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | > | >> | >> | > | The code is all being managed in the glassdb
> | > | >> | >> | > | organization on
> | > | >> | >> | > | GitHub
> | > | >> | >> | > | and I can add GLASS developers to the organization
> | > | >> | >> | > | so
> | > | >> | >> | > | that I
> | > | >> | >> | > | won't
> | > | >> | >> | > | be the only person with the ability to approve pull
> | > | >> | >> | > | requests
> | > | >> | >> | > | ...
> | > | >> | >> | > | getting me off the critical path for doing
> | > | >> | >> | > | integration
> | > | >> | >> | > | ..
> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | > | >> | >> | > | I'm not thinking that everyone will drop what they
> | > | >> | >> | > | are
> | > | >> | >> | > | doing
> | > | >> | >> | > | and
> | > | >> | >> | > | start work in Zinc (myself I'm preparing for a STIC
> | > | >> | >> | > | talk
> | > | >> | >> | > | next
> | > | >> | >> | > | week
> | > | >> | >> | > | so I'm not going to be able to do too much between
> | > | >> | >> | > | now
> | > | >> | >> | > | and
> | > | >> | >> | > | then),
> | > | >> | >> | > | but we can start talking about the mechanics and
> | > | >> | >> | > | when
> | > | >> | >> | > | folks
> | > | >> | >> | > | find
> | > | >> | >> | > | opportunities to contribute we'll have an idea how
> | > | >> | >> | > | we
> | > | >> | >> | > | want
> | > | >> | >> | > | to
> | > | >> | >> | > | proceed.
> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | > | >> | >> | > | Dale
> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | > | >> | >> | > | [1] https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc
> | > | >> | >> | > | [2]
> | > | >> | >> | > | https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc/jobs/7744348#L128
> | > | >> | >> | > | [3] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside30
> | > | >> | >> | > | [4] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside31
> | > | >> | >> | > | [5] https://github.com/glassdb/zodiac
> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | > | >> | >> |
> | > | >> | >> |
> | > | >> | >
> | > | >> |
> | > | >> |
> | > | >
> | > |
> | > |
> |
> |

> I worked my way through the commit conflicts.
> Seems like we need a tool that uses information from the filetree format to help in these things. Changed methods and changed methodproperties files correlate and can help in resolving the conflict. In addition, it seems preferable to adapt the methodproperties accordingly to the chosen method version in the merge.
>
> Everything was now pushed to my fork and I should still look at the orphaned methods.
>
> Now setting up Travis for my account...
>
> On 15 Jun 2013, at 22:32, Dale K. Henrichs <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I haven't actually looked at the merge results ... Sven mentioned that he had done a bunch of package renames ... the package renames _should_ end up handled by git as a file rename and not a conflict ... when you mentioned a lot of changes, I just assumed the worst ...
>>
>> Glad to hear that there are mostly benign changes ... the dang newlines are a persistent problem that I need to figure out (for GemStone) ... I'm pretty sure that there were package renames, so the BaselineOf will probably need to be changed ... also look for "orhpaned methods" (methods that were added for GemStone and left behind by the package rename ...
>>
>> If you are making good progress then I don't need to look until you get down to the end:)
>>
>> Dale
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
>> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion" <[hidden email]>
>> | Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 12:21:36 PM
>> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
>> |
>> | Dale,
>> |
>> | Just to be sure: I used git merge to merge the branches and I am now
>> | working my way through the conflicts. They mostly seem to be the
>> | missing newline at the end of methods and the methodProperties.json.
>> | If you mention there were a lot of real conflicting changes, I am
>> | suspicious if git merge is really giving me a good end-result here.
>> |
>> | Now that I come to think of it... git merge is not going to signal me
>> | if the same method was changed, like monticello does. So: are you
>> | using monticello merge over filetree repositories or are you using
>> | git merge to do this kind of work?
>> |
>> | Johan
>> |
>> | On 15 Jun 2013, at 20:59, "Dale K. Henrichs"
>> | <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> |
>> | > Johan,
>> | >
>> | > Yep that's the model ... and now you see why I wasn't so fast to
>> | > merge Sven's changes at the time he published them ... If I recall
>> | > correctly, Sven renamed a bunch of packages (it is possible that
>> | > he did more than that as well?) ....
>> | >
>> | > If you push your work up to github (perhaps on a branch off of
>> | > master) I can look at the diffs and help plan a course of action
>> | > (inline comments).
>> | >
>> | > It may turn out to be easier to backport the GemStone specific
>> | > changes than to merge the new work back into GemStone ...
>> | >
>> | > Dale
>> | >
>> | > ----- Original Message -----
>> | > | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
>> | > | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
>> | > | <[hidden email]>
>> | > | Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 11:36:15 AM
>> | > | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
>> | > |
>> | > | So, now that I am this far, I think it's worth doing something
>> | > | more
>> | > | substantial than my existing pull request (which, strangely, was
>> | > | the
>> | > | only failing test in my case -- different from travis build?)
>> | > |
>> | > | Since the version difference of Zinc between Pharo and GLASS is a
>> | > | bit
>> | > | of a hurdle, I thought it would be good to pull in Sven's latest
>> | > | changes. It's not the latest version in Pharo but it's a good
>> | > | step.
>> | > | How does one go about this? Is there a specific workflow that
>> | > | works
>> | > | well for Smalltalk projects and are there conventions to be
>> | > | followed?
>> | > |
>> | > | I fetched Sven's repository and merged it into my local fork of
>> | > | the
>> | > | master branch. I am correct that glassdb/zinc/master is supposed
>> | > | to
>> | > | be the copy of the svenc/zinc/master ?
>> | > | Next, I merged the master branch into the gemstone2.4 branch and,
>> | > | obviously, merge conflict hell broke loose. Now looking at
>> | > | those...
>> | > |
>> | > | All of this only in my local repo, of course.
>> | > | Is this how it's supposed to work?
>> | > |
>> | > | Johan
>> | > |
>> | > | On 14 Jun 2013, at 20:34, Johan Brichau <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> | > |
>> | > | > Hi Dale,
>> | > | >
>> | > | > I finally got to updating my fork by fetching the upstream
>> | > | > changes.
>> | > | > Seems like travis got to work immediately.
>> | > | >
>> | > | > Really nice show case for working together. I like it!
>> | > | >
>> | > | > Johan
>> | > | >
>> | > | > On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:46, Dale K. Henrichs
>> | > | > <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> | > | >
>> | > | >> I think it's the missing .travis.yml file ... the travis
>> | > | >> builds
>> | > | >> should be triggered whether or not the commit can be merged
>> | > | >> automatically ... another possibility is that the pull request
>> | > | >> was created before I enabled the travis builds, or ...
>> | > | >>
>> | > | >> We'll try a new pull request if the merge doesn't work...
>> | > | >>
>> | > | >> Dale
>> | > | >>
>> | > | >> ----- Original Message -----
>> | > | >> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
>> | > | >> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
>> | > | >> | <[hidden email]>
>> | > | >> | Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 6:20:56 AM
>> | > | >> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
>> | > | >> |
>> | > | >> | I think it is because the pull request could not be merged
>> | > | >> | automatically ?
>> | > | >> |
>> | > | >> | Ok... will look into this
>> | > | >> | As I said, it's already a few months old, so I need to
>> | > | >> | update it
>> | > | >> |
>> | > | >> | On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:15, Johan Brichau <[hidden email]>
>> | > | >> | wrote:
>> | > | >> |
>> | > | >> | > Dale,
>> | > | >> | >
>> | > | >> | > I did a change to the pull request but nothing happened.
>> | > | >> | >
>> | > | >> | > I have never used travis-CI, so what should I do more to
>> | > | >> | > trigger
>> | > | >> | > the build here?
>> | > | >> | >
>> | > | >> | > On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:05, "Dale K. Henrichs"
>> | > | >> | > <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> | > | >> | >
>> | > | >> | >> Johan,
>> | > | >> | >>
>> | > | >> | >> No nothing broken and I have not even looked at the
>> | > | >> | >> commit
>> | > | >> | >> ... I
>> | > | >> | >> just figured that a pull request on your part (or Ken's)
>> | > | >> | >> will
>> | > | >> | >> get
>> | > | >> | >> things started.
>> | > | >> | >>
>> | > | >> | >> We are all busy, but if we start leveraging github and
>> | > | >> | >> travis-ci I
>> | > | >> | >> think we will be more efficient in managing contributions
>> | > | >> | >> ...
>> | > | >> | >> folks can contribute a patch for a single test and the
>> | > | >> | >> whole
>> | > | >> | >> community can track progress towards green tests ...
>> | > | >> | >>
>> | > | >> | >> Dale
>> | > | >> | >>
>> | > | >> | >> ----- Original Message -----
>> | > | >> | >> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
>> | > | >> | >> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
>> | > | >> | >> | <[hidden email]>
>> | > | >> | >> | Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2013 12:28:11 PM
>> | > | >> | >> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
>> | > | >> | >> |
>> | > | >> | >> | Hi Dale,
>> | > | >> | >> |
>> | > | >> | >> | Thanks for pulling the rope here.
>> | > | >> | >> |
>> | > | >> | >> | I made a benign change... did that do something?
>> | > | >> | >> | Mind that I noticed how the commit also showed a lot
>> | > | >> | >> | more
>> | > | >> | >> | changed
>> | > | >> | >> | lines than what I actually changed. Seems like a
>> | > | >> | >> | filetree
>> | > | >> | >> | issue.
>> | > | >> | >> |
>> | > | >> | >> | This was already quite some time ago. I will take a
>> | > | >> | >> | look
>> | > | >> | >> | soon to
>> | > | >> | >> | create a new pull request.
>> | > | >> | >> |
>> | > | >> | >> | ps: yes, we are using this version of Zinc in
>> | > | >> | >> | production
>> | > | >> | >> | and
>> | > | >> | >> | it's
>> | > | >> | >> | working very well. The failing tests are not harming us
>> | > | >> | >> | and
>> | > | >> | >> | we
>> | > | >> | >> | were
>> | > | >> | >> | already anticipating that we should bring the gemstone
>> | > | >> | >> | port
>> | > | >> | >> | up
>> | > | >> | >> | to
>> | > | >> | >> | speed with the current status in Pharo. hence...
>> | > | >> | >> |
>> | > | >> | >> | On 03 Jun 2013, at 21:43, Dale K. Henrichs
>> | > | >> | >> | <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> | > | >> | >> |
>> | > | >> | >> | > Johan,
>> | > | >> | >> | >
>> | > | >> | >> | > You have an existing pull request for Zinc. If you
>> | > | >> | >> | > make a
>> | > | >> | >> | > benign
>> | > | >> | >> | > change and do a new commit on your branch and then
>> | > | >> | >> | > push
>> | > | >> | >> | > that
>> | > | >> | >> | > commit to GitHub it will trigger a travisCI build ...
>> | > | >> | >> | > it
>> | > | >> | >> | > will
>> | > | >> | >> | > make
>> | > | >> | >> | > a nice example of how pull requests and travis work
>> | > | >> | >> | > together
>> | > | >> | >> | > ...
>> | > | >> | >> | >
>> | > | >> | >> | > Dale
>> | > | >> | >> | >
>> | > | >> | >> | >
>> | > | >> | >> | > ----- Original Message -----
>> | > | >> | >> | > | From: "Dale K. Henrichs"
>> | > | >> | >> | > | <[hidden email]>
>> | > | >> | >> | > | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
>> | > | >> | >> | > | <[hidden email]>
>> | > | >> | >> | > | Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 12:05:19 PM
>> | > | >> | >> | > | Subject: GitHub and Zinc
>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>> | > | >> | >> | > | As you probably all know, I've spent the bulk of
>> | > | >> | >> | > | the
>> | > | >> | >> | > | last
>> | > | >> | >> | > | year or
>> | > | >> | >> | > | so
>> | > | >> | >> | > | working on GitHub, TravisCI, FileTree, Metacello
>> | > | >> | >> | > | and
>> | > | >> | >> | > | tODE.
>> | > | >> | >> | > | My
>> | > | >> | >> | > | primary motivation has been to improve the
>> | > | >> | >> | > | collaboration
>> | > | >> | >> | > | experience
>> | > | >> | >> | > | for GLASS.
>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>> | > | >> | >> | > | Recently I have had the opportunity to collaborate
>> | > | >> | >> | > | with
>> | > | >> | >> | > | Christophe
>> | > | >> | >> | > | Demarey on porting the Metacello Preview to
>> | > | >> | >> | > | Pharo2.0
>> | > | >> | >> | > | leveraging
>> | > | >> | >> | > | the
>> | > | >> | >> | > | collaboration facilities available on GitHub and
>> | > | >> | >> | > | TravisCI.
>> | > | >> | >> | > | The
>> | > | >> | >> | > | effort has been very successful and I think it is
>> | > | >> | >> | > | time
>> | > | >> | >> | > | to
>> | > | >> | >> | > | start
>> | > | >> | >> | > | leveraging GitHub and TravisCI for GLASS
>> | > | >> | >> | > | development.
>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>> | > | >> | >> | > | John's bug report this morning makes me think that
>> | > | >> | >> | > | the
>> | > | >> | >> | > | Zinc
>> | > | >> | >> | > | project
>> | > | >> | >> | > | will be a good first step to working out the kinks
>> | > | >> | >> | > | in
>> | > | >> | >> | > | using
>> | > | >> | >> | > | GitHub/TravisCI.
>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>> | > | >> | >> | > | I have just now finished setting up the Zinc
>> | > | >> | >> | > | project to
>> | > | >> | >> | > | automatically
>> | > | >> | >> | > | run TravisCI builds for all commits/pull
>> | > | >> | >> | > | requests[1].
>> | > | >> | >> | > | The
>> | > | >> | >> | > | tests
>> | > | >> | >> | > | are
>> | > | >> | >> | > | failing on both gemstone2.4 and gemstone3.1
>> | > | >> | >> | > | branches,
>> | > | >> | >> | > | but I
>> | > | >> | >> | > | assume
>> | > | >> | >> | > | that folks are actually using Zinc in production
>> | > | >> | >> | > | and
>> | > | >> | >> | > | have
>> | > | >> | >> | > | either
>> | > | >> | >> | > | got
>> | > | >> | >> | > | fixes for some of the test failures, or the tests
>> | > | >> | >> | > | are
>> | > | >> | >> | > | failing in
>> | > | >> | >> | > | benign ways ...
>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>> | > | >> | >> | > | For gemstone2.4 the following tests are failing:
>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>> | > | >> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
>> | > | >> | >> | > | Results for anArray( 'BaselineOfZinc') Test Suite
>> | > | >> | >> | > | 240 run, 232 passes, 4 expected defects, 4
>> | > | >> | >> | > | failures, 0
>> | > | >> | >> | > | errors, 0
>> | > | >> | >> | > | unexpected passes
>> | > | >> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
>> | > | >> | >> | > | *** FAILURES *******************
>> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testCookiesForUrl'.
>> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug:
>> | > | >> | >> | > | #'testCookieAtForUrl'.
>> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testAdd'.
>> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieTests debug: #'testFromString'.
>> | > | >> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>> | > | >> | >> | > | For gemstone3.1 the same tests are failing along
>> | > | >> | >> | > | with a
>> | > | >> | >> | > | bunch of
>> | > | >> | >> | > | errors[2].
>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>> | > | >> | >> | > | Ken has a fork of gemstone3.1 and I am suspicious
>> | > | >> | >> | > | that
>> | > | >> | >> | > | his
>> | > | >> | >> | > | branch
>> | > | >> | >> | > | may
>> | > | >> | >> | > | have fixes for many of the gemstone3.1
>> | > | >> | >> | > | issues/errors.
>> | > | >> | >> | > | Johan
>> | > | >> | >> | > | has a
>> | > | >> | >> | > | fork of gemstone2.4 with a fix for a particular
>> | > | >> | >> | > | test.
>> | > | >> | >> | > | We
>> | > | >> | >> | > | have
>> | > | >> | >> | > | Johns'
>> | > | >> | >> | > | bug report. We have new checkins from Sven that
>> | > | >> | >> | > | have
>> | > | >> | >> | > | yet to
>> | > | >> | >> | > | be
>> | > | >> | >> | > | integrated.
>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>> | > | >> | >> | > | The fork/pull request model on GitHub works very
>> | > | >> | >> | > | well
>> | > | >> | >> | > | for
>> | > | >> | >> | > | submitting
>> | > | >> | >> | > | updates for inclusion in the main repository:
>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>> | > | >> | >> | > |   - tests are run with TravisCI
>> | > | >> | >> | > |   - and the changes made in pull request can be
>> | > | >> | >> | > |   reviewed
>> | > | >> | >> | > |   with
>> | > | >> | >> | > |   comments
>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>> | > | >> | >> | > | So a green run combined with a clean code review,
>> | > | >> | >> | > | means
>> | > | >> | >> | > | that
>> | > | >> | >> | > | fixes
>> | > | >> | >> | > | can be merged into the release branch and folks can
>> | > | >> | >> | > | feel
>> | > | >> | >> | > | comfortable
>> | > | >> | >> | > | either using the branch directly or integrating
>> | > | >> | >> | > | into
>> | > | >> | >> | > | their
>> | > | >> | >> | > | own
>> | > | >> | >> | > | forks.
>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>> | > | >> | >> | > | Moving forward their are additional projects like
>> | > | >> | >> | > | porting
>> | > | >> | >> | > | Seaside3.1
>> | > | >> | >> | > | to GemStone that we can collaborate on. Paul and I
>> | > | >> | >> | > | have
>> | > | >> | >> | > | already
>> | > | >> | >> | > | started on the project, but haven't touched in the
>> | > | >> | >> | > | last
>> | > | >> | >> | > | couple of
>> | > | >> | >> | > | weeks[3]&[4]. Presumably there is also interest in
>> | > | >> | >> | > | getting
>> | > | >> | >> | > | Zodiac[4]
>> | > | >> | >> | > | ported to GemStone as well...
>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>> | > | >> | >> | > | The code is all being managed in the glassdb
>> | > | >> | >> | > | organization on
>> | > | >> | >> | > | GitHub
>> | > | >> | >> | > | and I can add GLASS developers to the organization
>> | > | >> | >> | > | so
>> | > | >> | >> | > | that I
>> | > | >> | >> | > | won't
>> | > | >> | >> | > | be the only person with the ability to approve pull
>> | > | >> | >> | > | requests
>> | > | >> | >> | > | ...
>> | > | >> | >> | > | getting me off the critical path for doing
>> | > | >> | >> | > | integration
>> | > | >> | >> | > | ..
>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>> | > | >> | >> | > | I'm not thinking that everyone will drop what they
>> | > | >> | >> | > | are
>> | > | >> | >> | > | doing
>> | > | >> | >> | > | and
>> | > | >> | >> | > | start work in Zinc (myself I'm preparing for a STIC
>> | > | >> | >> | > | talk
>> | > | >> | >> | > | next
>> | > | >> | >> | > | week
>> | > | >> | >> | > | so I'm not going to be able to do too much between
>> | > | >> | >> | > | now
>> | > | >> | >> | > | and
>> | > | >> | >> | > | then),
>> | > | >> | >> | > | but we can start talking about the mechanics and
>> | > | >> | >> | > | when
>> | > | >> | >> | > | folks
>> | > | >> | >> | > | find
>> | > | >> | >> | > | opportunities to contribute we'll have an idea how
>> | > | >> | >> | > | we
>> | > | >> | >> | > | want
>> | > | >> | >> | > | to
>> | > | >> | >> | > | proceed.
>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>> | > | >> | >> | > | Dale
>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>> | > | >> | >> | > | [1] https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc
>> | > | >> | >> | > | [2]
>> | > | >> | >> | > | https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc/jobs/7744348#L128
>> | > | >> | >> | > | [3] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside30
>> | > | >> | >> | > | [4] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside31
>> | > | >> | >> | > | [5] https://github.com/glassdb/zodiac
>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>> | > | >> | >> |
>> | > | >> | >> |
>> | > | >> | >
>> | > | >> |
>> | > | >> |
>> | > | >
>> | > |
>> | > |
>> |
>> |
>

> Allright, I think I made good progress porting Zinc 2.3.2 to GLASS:
>
> 248 run, 238 passes, 4 expected defects, 6 failures, 0 errors, 0 unexpected passes
>
> It's now only in my fork on https://github.com/jbrichau/zinc  (gemstone2.4 branch)
> We should discuss the two issues I added to the issue list (and mentioned in this commit: https://github.com/jbrichau/zinc/commit/723d21faa9b5e258e09c2395ecf8b040d28b0b1d )
>
> The remaining failures are a bit more tricky... so I am giving it a rest for the remainder of the day.
>
> Johan
>
> On 16 Jun 2013, at 10:55, Johan Brichau <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I worked my way through the commit conflicts.
>> Seems like we need a tool that uses information from the filetree format to help in these things. Changed methods and changed methodproperties files correlate and can help in resolving the conflict. In addition, it seems preferable to adapt the methodproperties accordingly to the chosen method version in the merge.
>>
>> Everything was now pushed to my fork and I should still look at the orphaned methods.
>>
>> Now setting up Travis for my account...
>>
>> On 15 Jun 2013, at 22:32, Dale K. Henrichs <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> I haven't actually looked at the merge results ... Sven mentioned that he had done a bunch of package renames ... the package renames _should_ end up handled by git as a file rename and not a conflict ... when you mentioned a lot of changes, I just assumed the worst ...
>>>
>>> Glad to hear that there are mostly benign changes ... the dang newlines are a persistent problem that I need to figure out (for GemStone) ... I'm pretty sure that there were package renames, so the BaselineOf will probably need to be changed ... also look for "orhpaned methods" (methods that were added for GemStone and left behind by the package rename ...
>>>
>>> If you are making good progress then I don't need to look until you get down to the end:)
>>>
>>> Dale
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
>>> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion" <[hidden email]>
>>> | Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 12:21:36 PM
>>> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
>>> |
>>> | Dale,
>>> |
>>> | Just to be sure: I used git merge to merge the branches and I am now
>>> | working my way through the conflicts. They mostly seem to be the
>>> | missing newline at the end of methods and the methodProperties.json.
>>> | If you mention there were a lot of real conflicting changes, I am
>>> | suspicious if git merge is really giving me a good end-result here.
>>> |
>>> | Now that I come to think of it... git merge is not going to signal me
>>> | if the same method was changed, like monticello does. So: are you
>>> | using monticello merge over filetree repositories or are you using
>>> | git merge to do this kind of work?
>>> |
>>> | Johan
>>> |
>>> | On 15 Jun 2013, at 20:59, "Dale K. Henrichs"
>>> | <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> |
>>> | > Johan,
>>> | >
>>> | > Yep that's the model ... and now you see why I wasn't so fast to
>>> | > merge Sven's changes at the time he published them ... If I recall
>>> | > correctly, Sven renamed a bunch of packages (it is possible that
>>> | > he did more than that as well?) ....
>>> | >
>>> | > If you push your work up to github (perhaps on a branch off of
>>> | > master) I can look at the diffs and help plan a course of action
>>> | > (inline comments).
>>> | >
>>> | > It may turn out to be easier to backport the GemStone specific
>>> | > changes than to merge the new work back into GemStone ...
>>> | >
>>> | > Dale
>>> | >
>>> | > ----- Original Message -----
>>> | > | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
>>> | > | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
>>> | > | <[hidden email]>
>>> | > | Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 11:36:15 AM
>>> | > | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
>>> | > |
>>> | > | So, now that I am this far, I think it's worth doing something
>>> | > | more
>>> | > | substantial than my existing pull request (which, strangely, was
>>> | > | the
>>> | > | only failing test in my case -- different from travis build?)
>>> | > |
>>> | > | Since the version difference of Zinc between Pharo and GLASS is a
>>> | > | bit
>>> | > | of a hurdle, I thought it would be good to pull in Sven's latest
>>> | > | changes. It's not the latest version in Pharo but it's a good
>>> | > | step.
>>> | > | How does one go about this? Is there a specific workflow that
>>> | > | works
>>> | > | well for Smalltalk projects and are there conventions to be
>>> | > | followed?
>>> | > |
>>> | > | I fetched Sven's repository and merged it into my local fork of
>>> | > | the
>>> | > | master branch. I am correct that glassdb/zinc/master is supposed
>>> | > | to
>>> | > | be the copy of the svenc/zinc/master ?
>>> | > | Next, I merged the master branch into the gemstone2.4 branch and,
>>> | > | obviously, merge conflict hell broke loose. Now looking at
>>> | > | those...
>>> | > |
>>> | > | All of this only in my local repo, of course.
>>> | > | Is this how it's supposed to work?
>>> | > |
>>> | > | Johan
>>> | > |
>>> | > | On 14 Jun 2013, at 20:34, Johan Brichau <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> | > |
>>> | > | > Hi Dale,
>>> | > | >
>>> | > | > I finally got to updating my fork by fetching the upstream
>>> | > | > changes.
>>> | > | > Seems like travis got to work immediately.
>>> | > | >
>>> | > | > Really nice show case for working together. I like it!
>>> | > | >
>>> | > | > Johan
>>> | > | >
>>> | > | > On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:46, Dale K. Henrichs
>>> | > | > <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> | > | >
>>> | > | >> I think it's the missing .travis.yml file ... the travis
>>> | > | >> builds
>>> | > | >> should be triggered whether or not the commit can be merged
>>> | > | >> automatically ... another possibility is that the pull request
>>> | > | >> was created before I enabled the travis builds, or ...
>>> | > | >>
>>> | > | >> We'll try a new pull request if the merge doesn't work...
>>> | > | >>
>>> | > | >> Dale
>>> | > | >>
>>> | > | >> ----- Original Message -----
>>> | > | >> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
>>> | > | >> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
>>> | > | >> | <[hidden email]>
>>> | > | >> | Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 6:20:56 AM
>>> | > | >> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
>>> | > | >> |
>>> | > | >> | I think it is because the pull request could not be merged
>>> | > | >> | automatically ?
>>> | > | >> |
>>> | > | >> | Ok... will look into this
>>> | > | >> | As I said, it's already a few months old, so I need to
>>> | > | >> | update it
>>> | > | >> |
>>> | > | >> | On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:15, Johan Brichau <[hidden email]>
>>> | > | >> | wrote:
>>> | > | >> |
>>> | > | >> | > Dale,
>>> | > | >> | >
>>> | > | >> | > I did a change to the pull request but nothing happened.
>>> | > | >> | >
>>> | > | >> | > I have never used travis-CI, so what should I do more to
>>> | > | >> | > trigger
>>> | > | >> | > the build here?
>>> | > | >> | >
>>> | > | >> | > On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:05, "Dale K. Henrichs"
>>> | > | >> | > <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> | > | >> | >
>>> | > | >> | >> Johan,
>>> | > | >> | >>
>>> | > | >> | >> No nothing broken and I have not even looked at the
>>> | > | >> | >> commit
>>> | > | >> | >> ... I
>>> | > | >> | >> just figured that a pull request on your part (or Ken's)
>>> | > | >> | >> will
>>> | > | >> | >> get
>>> | > | >> | >> things started.
>>> | > | >> | >>
>>> | > | >> | >> We are all busy, but if we start leveraging github and
>>> | > | >> | >> travis-ci I
>>> | > | >> | >> think we will be more efficient in managing contributions
>>> | > | >> | >> ...
>>> | > | >> | >> folks can contribute a patch for a single test and the
>>> | > | >> | >> whole
>>> | > | >> | >> community can track progress towards green tests ...
>>> | > | >> | >>
>>> | > | >> | >> Dale
>>> | > | >> | >>
>>> | > | >> | >> ----- Original Message -----
>>> | > | >> | >> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
>>> | > | >> | >> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
>>> | > | >> | >> | <[hidden email]>
>>> | > | >> | >> | Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2013 12:28:11 PM
>>> | > | >> | >> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
>>> | > | >> | >> |
>>> | > | >> | >> | Hi Dale,
>>> | > | >> | >> |
>>> | > | >> | >> | Thanks for pulling the rope here.
>>> | > | >> | >> |
>>> | > | >> | >> | I made a benign change... did that do something?
>>> | > | >> | >> | Mind that I noticed how the commit also showed a lot
>>> | > | >> | >> | more
>>> | > | >> | >> | changed
>>> | > | >> | >> | lines than what I actually changed. Seems like a
>>> | > | >> | >> | filetree
>>> | > | >> | >> | issue.
>>> | > | >> | >> |
>>> | > | >> | >> | This was already quite some time ago. I will take a
>>> | > | >> | >> | look
>>> | > | >> | >> | soon to
>>> | > | >> | >> | create a new pull request.
>>> | > | >> | >> |
>>> | > | >> | >> | ps: yes, we are using this version of Zinc in
>>> | > | >> | >> | production
>>> | > | >> | >> | and
>>> | > | >> | >> | it's
>>> | > | >> | >> | working very well. The failing tests are not harming us
>>> | > | >> | >> | and
>>> | > | >> | >> | we
>>> | > | >> | >> | were
>>> | > | >> | >> | already anticipating that we should bring the gemstone
>>> | > | >> | >> | port
>>> | > | >> | >> | up
>>> | > | >> | >> | to
>>> | > | >> | >> | speed with the current status in Pharo. hence...
>>> | > | >> | >> |
>>> | > | >> | >> | On 03 Jun 2013, at 21:43, Dale K. Henrichs
>>> | > | >> | >> | <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> | > | >> | >> |
>>> | > | >> | >> | > Johan,
>>> | > | >> | >> | >
>>> | > | >> | >> | > You have an existing pull request for Zinc. If you
>>> | > | >> | >> | > make a
>>> | > | >> | >> | > benign
>>> | > | >> | >> | > change and do a new commit on your branch and then
>>> | > | >> | >> | > push
>>> | > | >> | >> | > that
>>> | > | >> | >> | > commit to GitHub it will trigger a travisCI build ...
>>> | > | >> | >> | > it
>>> | > | >> | >> | > will
>>> | > | >> | >> | > make
>>> | > | >> | >> | > a nice example of how pull requests and travis work
>>> | > | >> | >> | > together
>>> | > | >> | >> | > ...
>>> | > | >> | >> | >
>>> | > | >> | >> | > Dale
>>> | > | >> | >> | >
>>> | > | >> | >> | >
>>> | > | >> | >> | > ----- Original Message -----
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | From: "Dale K. Henrichs"
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | <[hidden email]>
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | <[hidden email]>
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 12:05:19 PM
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Subject: GitHub and Zinc
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | As you probably all know, I've spent the bulk of
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | the
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | last
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | year or
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | so
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | working on GitHub, TravisCI, FileTree, Metacello
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | and
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | tODE.
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | My
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | primary motivation has been to improve the
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | collaboration
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | experience
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | for GLASS.
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Recently I have had the opportunity to collaborate
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | with
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Christophe
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Demarey on porting the Metacello Preview to
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Pharo2.0
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | leveraging
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | the
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | collaboration facilities available on GitHub and
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | TravisCI.
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | The
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | effort has been very successful and I think it is
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | time
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | to
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | start
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | leveraging GitHub and TravisCI for GLASS
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | development.
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | John's bug report this morning makes me think that
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | the
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Zinc
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | project
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | will be a good first step to working out the kinks
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | in
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | using
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | GitHub/TravisCI.
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | I have just now finished setting up the Zinc
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | project to
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | automatically
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | run TravisCI builds for all commits/pull
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | requests[1].
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | The
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | tests
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | are
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | failing on both gemstone2.4 and gemstone3.1
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | branches,
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | but I
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | assume
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | that folks are actually using Zinc in production
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | and
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | have
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | either
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | got
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | fixes for some of the test failures, or the tests
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | are
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | failing in
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | benign ways ...
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | For gemstone2.4 the following tests are failing:
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Results for anArray( 'BaselineOfZinc') Test Suite
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | 240 run, 232 passes, 4 expected defects, 4
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | failures, 0
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | errors, 0
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | unexpected passes
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | *** FAILURES *******************
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testCookiesForUrl'.
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug:
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | #'testCookieAtForUrl'.
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testAdd'.
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieTests debug: #'testFromString'.
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | For gemstone3.1 the same tests are failing along
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | with a
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | bunch of
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | errors[2].
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Ken has a fork of gemstone3.1 and I am suspicious
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | that
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | his
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | branch
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | may
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | have fixes for many of the gemstone3.1
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | issues/errors.
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Johan
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | has a
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | fork of gemstone2.4 with a fix for a particular
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | test.
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | We
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | have
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Johns'
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | bug report. We have new checkins from Sven that
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | have
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | yet to
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | be
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | integrated.
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | The fork/pull request model on GitHub works very
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | well
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | for
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | submitting
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | updates for inclusion in the main repository:
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |   - tests are run with TravisCI
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |   - and the changes made in pull request can be
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |   reviewed
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |   with
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |   comments
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | So a green run combined with a clean code review,
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | means
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | that
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | fixes
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | can be merged into the release branch and folks can
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | feel
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | comfortable
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | either using the branch directly or integrating
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | into
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | their
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | own
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | forks.
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Moving forward their are additional projects like
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | porting
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Seaside3.1
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | to GemStone that we can collaborate on. Paul and I
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | have
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | already
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | started on the project, but haven't touched in the
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | last
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | couple of
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | weeks[3]&[4]. Presumably there is also interest in
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | getting
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Zodiac[4]
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | ported to GemStone as well...
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | The code is all being managed in the glassdb
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | organization on
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | GitHub
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | and I can add GLASS developers to the organization
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | so
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | that I
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | won't
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | be the only person with the ability to approve pull
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | requests
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | ...
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | getting me off the critical path for doing
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | integration
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | ..
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | I'm not thinking that everyone will drop what they
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | are
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | doing
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | and
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | start work in Zinc (myself I'm preparing for a STIC
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | talk
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | next
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | week
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | so I'm not going to be able to do too much between
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | now
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | and
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | then),
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | but we can start talking about the mechanics and
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | when
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | folks
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | find
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | opportunities to contribute we'll have an idea how
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | we
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | want
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | to
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | proceed.
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Dale
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | [1] https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | [2]
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc/jobs/7744348#L128
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | [3] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside30
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | [4] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside31
>>> | > | >> | >> | > | [5] https://github.com/glassdb/zodiac
>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>> | > | >> | >> |
>>> | > | >> | >> |
>>> | > | >> | >
>>> | > | >> |
>>> | > | >> |
>>> | > | >
>>> | > |
>>> | > |
>>> |
>>> |
>>
>

> Thanks for doing this.
>
>
>
>
> On 06/16/2013 07:54 AM, Johan Brichau wrote:
>> Allright, I think I made good progress porting Zinc 2.3.2 to GLASS:
>>
>> 248 run, 238 passes, 4 expected defects, 6 failures, 0 errors, 0 unexpected passes
>>
>> It's now only in my fork on https://github.com/jbrichau/zinc  (gemstone2.4 branch)
>> We should discuss the two issues I added to the issue list (and mentioned in this commit: https://github.com/jbrichau/zinc/commit/723d21faa9b5e258e09c2395ecf8b040d28b0b1d )
>>
>> The remaining failures are a bit more tricky... so I am giving it a rest for the remainder of the day.
>>
>> Johan
>>
>> On 16 Jun 2013, at 10:55, Johan Brichau <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> I worked my way through the commit conflicts.
>>> Seems like we need a tool that uses information from the filetree format to help in these things. Changed methods and changed methodproperties files correlate and can help in resolving the conflict. In addition, it seems preferable to adapt the methodproperties accordingly to the chosen method version in the merge.
>>>
>>> Everything was now pushed to my fork and I should still look at the orphaned methods.
>>>
>>> Now setting up Travis for my account...
>>>
>>> On 15 Jun 2013, at 22:32, Dale K. Henrichs <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I haven't actually looked at the merge results ... Sven mentioned that he had done a bunch of package renames ... the package renames _should_ end up handled by git as a file rename and not a conflict ... when you mentioned a lot of changes, I just assumed the worst ...
>>>>
>>>> Glad to hear that there are mostly benign changes ... the dang newlines are a persistent problem that I need to figure out (for GemStone) ... I'm pretty sure that there were package renames, so the BaselineOf will probably need to be changed ... also look for "orhpaned methods" (methods that were added for GemStone and left behind by the package rename ...
>>>>
>>>> If you are making good progress then I don't need to look until you get down to the end:)
>>>>
>>>> Dale
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
>>>> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion" <[hidden email]>
>>>> | Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 12:21:36 PM
>>>> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
>>>> |
>>>> | Dale,
>>>> |
>>>> | Just to be sure: I used git merge to merge the branches and I am now
>>>> | working my way through the conflicts. They mostly seem to be the
>>>> | missing newline at the end of methods and the methodProperties.json.
>>>> | If you mention there were a lot of real conflicting changes, I am
>>>> | suspicious if git merge is really giving me a good end-result here.
>>>> |
>>>> | Now that I come to think of it... git merge is not going to signal me
>>>> | if the same method was changed, like monticello does. So: are you
>>>> | using monticello merge over filetree repositories or are you using
>>>> | git merge to do this kind of work?
>>>> |
>>>> | Johan
>>>> |
>>>> | On 15 Jun 2013, at 20:59, "Dale K. Henrichs"
>>>> | <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> |
>>>> | > Johan,
>>>> | >
>>>> | > Yep that's the model ... and now you see why I wasn't so fast to
>>>> | > merge Sven's changes at the time he published them ... If I recall
>>>> | > correctly, Sven renamed a bunch of packages (it is possible that
>>>> | > he did more than that as well?) ....
>>>> | >
>>>> | > If you push your work up to github (perhaps on a branch off of
>>>> | > master) I can look at the diffs and help plan a course of action
>>>> | > (inline comments).
>>>> | >
>>>> | > It may turn out to be easier to backport the GemStone specific
>>>> | > changes than to merge the new work back into GemStone ...
>>>> | >
>>>> | > Dale
>>>> | >
>>>> | > ----- Original Message -----
>>>> | > | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
>>>> | > | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
>>>> | > | <[hidden email]>
>>>> | > | Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 11:36:15 AM
>>>> | > | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
>>>> | > |
>>>> | > | So, now that I am this far, I think it's worth doing something
>>>> | > | more
>>>> | > | substantial than my existing pull request (which, strangely, was
>>>> | > | the
>>>> | > | only failing test in my case -- different from travis build?)
>>>> | > |
>>>> | > | Since the version difference of Zinc between Pharo and GLASS is a
>>>> | > | bit
>>>> | > | of a hurdle, I thought it would be good to pull in Sven's latest
>>>> | > | changes. It's not the latest version in Pharo but it's a good
>>>> | > | step.
>>>> | > | How does one go about this? Is there a specific workflow that
>>>> | > | works
>>>> | > | well for Smalltalk projects and are there conventions to be
>>>> | > | followed?
>>>> | > |
>>>> | > | I fetched Sven's repository and merged it into my local fork of
>>>> | > | the
>>>> | > | master branch. I am correct that glassdb/zinc/master is supposed
>>>> | > | to
>>>> | > | be the copy of the svenc/zinc/master ?
>>>> | > | Next, I merged the master branch into the gemstone2.4 branch and,
>>>> | > | obviously, merge conflict hell broke loose. Now looking at
>>>> | > | those...
>>>> | > |
>>>> | > | All of this only in my local repo, of course.
>>>> | > | Is this how it's supposed to work?
>>>> | > |
>>>> | > | Johan
>>>> | > |
>>>> | > | On 14 Jun 2013, at 20:34, Johan Brichau <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> | > |
>>>> | > | > Hi Dale,
>>>> | > | >
>>>> | > | > I finally got to updating my fork by fetching the upstream
>>>> | > | > changes.
>>>> | > | > Seems like travis got to work immediately.
>>>> | > | >
>>>> | > | > Really nice show case for working together. I like it!
>>>> | > | >
>>>> | > | > Johan
>>>> | > | >
>>>> | > | > On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:46, Dale K. Henrichs
>>>> | > | > <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> | > | >
>>>> | > | >> I think it's the missing .travis.yml file ... the travis
>>>> | > | >> builds
>>>> | > | >> should be triggered whether or not the commit can be merged
>>>> | > | >> automatically ... another possibility is that the pull request
>>>> | > | >> was created before I enabled the travis builds, or ...
>>>> | > | >>
>>>> | > | >> We'll try a new pull request if the merge doesn't work...
>>>> | > | >>
>>>> | > | >> Dale
>>>> | > | >>
>>>> | > | >> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> | > | >> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
>>>> | > | >> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
>>>> | > | >> | <[hidden email]>
>>>> | > | >> | Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 6:20:56 AM
>>>> | > | >> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
>>>> | > | >> |
>>>> | > | >> | I think it is because the pull request could not be merged
>>>> | > | >> | automatically ?
>>>> | > | >> |
>>>> | > | >> | Ok... will look into this
>>>> | > | >> | As I said, it's already a few months old, so I need to
>>>> | > | >> | update it
>>>> | > | >> |
>>>> | > | >> | On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:15, Johan Brichau <[hidden email]>
>>>> | > | >> | wrote:
>>>> | > | >> |
>>>> | > | >> | > Dale,
>>>> | > | >> | >
>>>> | > | >> | > I did a change to the pull request but nothing happened.
>>>> | > | >> | >
>>>> | > | >> | > I have never used travis-CI, so what should I do more to
>>>> | > | >> | > trigger
>>>> | > | >> | > the build here?
>>>> | > | >> | >
>>>> | > | >> | > On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:05, "Dale K. Henrichs"
>>>> | > | >> | > <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> | > | >> | >
>>>> | > | >> | >> Johan,
>>>> | > | >> | >>
>>>> | > | >> | >> No nothing broken and I have not even looked at the
>>>> | > | >> | >> commit
>>>> | > | >> | >> ... I
>>>> | > | >> | >> just figured that a pull request on your part (or Ken's)
>>>> | > | >> | >> will
>>>> | > | >> | >> get
>>>> | > | >> | >> things started.
>>>> | > | >> | >>
>>>> | > | >> | >> We are all busy, but if we start leveraging github and
>>>> | > | >> | >> travis-ci I
>>>> | > | >> | >> think we will be more efficient in managing contributions
>>>> | > | >> | >> ...
>>>> | > | >> | >> folks can contribute a patch for a single test and the
>>>> | > | >> | >> whole
>>>> | > | >> | >> community can track progress towards green tests ...
>>>> | > | >> | >>
>>>> | > | >> | >> Dale
>>>> | > | >> | >>
>>>> | > | >> | >> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> | > | >> | >> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
>>>> | > | >> | >> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
>>>> | > | >> | >> | <[hidden email]>
>>>> | > | >> | >> | Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2013 12:28:11 PM
>>>> | > | >> | >> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
>>>> | > | >> | >> |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | Hi Dale,
>>>> | > | >> | >> |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | Thanks for pulling the rope here.
>>>> | > | >> | >> |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | I made a benign change... did that do something?
>>>> | > | >> | >> | Mind that I noticed how the commit also showed a lot
>>>> | > | >> | >> | more
>>>> | > | >> | >> | changed
>>>> | > | >> | >> | lines than what I actually changed. Seems like a
>>>> | > | >> | >> | filetree
>>>> | > | >> | >> | issue.
>>>> | > | >> | >> |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | This was already quite some time ago. I will take a
>>>> | > | >> | >> | look
>>>> | > | >> | >> | soon to
>>>> | > | >> | >> | create a new pull request.
>>>> | > | >> | >> |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | ps: yes, we are using this version of Zinc in
>>>> | > | >> | >> | production
>>>> | > | >> | >> | and
>>>> | > | >> | >> | it's
>>>> | > | >> | >> | working very well. The failing tests are not harming us
>>>> | > | >> | >> | and
>>>> | > | >> | >> | we
>>>> | > | >> | >> | were
>>>> | > | >> | >> | already anticipating that we should bring the gemstone
>>>> | > | >> | >> | port
>>>> | > | >> | >> | up
>>>> | > | >> | >> | to
>>>> | > | >> | >> | speed with the current status in Pharo. hence...
>>>> | > | >> | >> |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | On 03 Jun 2013, at 21:43, Dale K. Henrichs
>>>> | > | >> | >> | <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>> | > | >> | >> |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > Johan,
>>>> | > | >> | >> | >
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > You have an existing pull request for Zinc. If you
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > make a
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > benign
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > change and do a new commit on your branch and then
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > push
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > that
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > commit to GitHub it will trigger a travisCI build ...
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > it
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > will
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > make
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > a nice example of how pull requests and travis work
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > together
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > ...
>>>> | > | >> | >> | >
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > Dale
>>>> | > | >> | >> | >
>>>> | > | >> | >> | >
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > ----- Original Message -----
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | From: "Dale K. Henrichs"
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | <[hidden email]>
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | <[hidden email]>
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 12:05:19 PM
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Subject: GitHub and Zinc
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | As you probably all know, I've spent the bulk of
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | the
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | last
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | year or
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | so
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | working on GitHub, TravisCI, FileTree, Metacello
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | and
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | tODE.
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | My
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | primary motivation has been to improve the
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | collaboration
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | experience
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | for GLASS.
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Recently I have had the opportunity to collaborate
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | with
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Christophe
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Demarey on porting the Metacello Preview to
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Pharo2.0
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | leveraging
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | the
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | collaboration facilities available on GitHub and
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | TravisCI.
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | The
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | effort has been very successful and I think it is
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | time
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | to
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | start
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | leveraging GitHub and TravisCI for GLASS
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | development.
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | John's bug report this morning makes me think that
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | the
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Zinc
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | project
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | will be a good first step to working out the kinks
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | in
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | using
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | GitHub/TravisCI.
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | I have just now finished setting up the Zinc
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | project to
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | automatically
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | run TravisCI builds for all commits/pull
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | requests[1].
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | The
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | tests
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | are
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | failing on both gemstone2.4 and gemstone3.1
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | branches,
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | but I
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | assume
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | that folks are actually using Zinc in production
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | and
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | have
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | either
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | got
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | fixes for some of the test failures, or the tests
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | are
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | failing in
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | benign ways ...
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | For gemstone2.4 the following tests are failing:
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Results for anArray( 'BaselineOfZinc') Test Suite
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | 240 run, 232 passes, 4 expected defects, 4
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | failures, 0
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | errors, 0
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | unexpected passes
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | *** FAILURES *******************
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testCookiesForUrl'.
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug:
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | #'testCookieAtForUrl'.
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testAdd'.
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieTests debug: #'testFromString'.
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | For gemstone3.1 the same tests are failing along
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | with a
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | bunch of
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | errors[2].
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Ken has a fork of gemstone3.1 and I am suspicious
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | that
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | his
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | branch
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | may
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | have fixes for many of the gemstone3.1
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | issues/errors.
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Johan
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | has a
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | fork of gemstone2.4 with a fix for a particular
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | test.
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | We
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | have
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Johns'
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | bug report. We have new checkins from Sven that
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | have
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | yet to
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | be
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | integrated.
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | The fork/pull request model on GitHub works very
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | well
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | for
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | submitting
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | updates for inclusion in the main repository:
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |   - tests are run with TravisCI
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |   - and the changes made in pull request can be
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |   reviewed
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |   with
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |   comments
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | So a green run combined with a clean code review,
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | means
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | that
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | fixes
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | can be merged into the release branch and folks can
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | feel
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | comfortable
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | either using the branch directly or integrating
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | into
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | their
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | own
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | forks.
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Moving forward their are additional projects like
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | porting
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Seaside3.1
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | to GemStone that we can collaborate on. Paul and I
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | have
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | already
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | started on the project, but haven't touched in the
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | last
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | couple of
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | weeks[3]&[4]. Presumably there is also interest in
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | getting
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Zodiac[4]
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | ported to GemStone as well...
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | The code is all being managed in the glassdb
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | organization on
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | GitHub
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | and I can add GLASS developers to the organization
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | so
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | that I
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | won't
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | be the only person with the ability to approve pull
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | requests
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | ...
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | getting me off the critical path for doing
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | integration
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | ..
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | I'm not thinking that everyone will drop what they
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | are
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | doing
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | and
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | start work in Zinc (myself I'm preparing for a STIC
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | talk
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | next
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | week
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | so I'm not going to be able to do too much between
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | now
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | and
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | then),
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | but we can start talking about the mechanics and
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | when
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | folks
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | find
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | opportunities to contribute we'll have an idea how
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | we
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | want
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | to
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | proceed.
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | Dale
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | [1] https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | [2]
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc/jobs/7744348#L128
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | [3] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside30
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | [4] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside31
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > | [5] https://github.com/glassdb/zodiac
>>>> | > | >> | >> | > |
>>>> | > | >> | >> |
>>>> | > | >> | >> |
>>>> | > | >> | >
>>>> | > | >> |
>>>> | > | >> |
>>>> | > | >
>>>> | > |
>>>> | > |
>>>> |
>>>> |
>>>
>>
>

> Looks great Johan!
>
>> From your travis results[1] I can see the handful of tests that are still failing:
>
> **************************************************************************************
> Results for anArray( 'BaselineOfZinc') Test Suite
> 248 run, 238 passes, 4 expected defects, 6 failures, 0 errors, 0 unexpected passes
> **************************************************************************************
> *** FAILURES *******************
> ZnServerTests debug: #'testSession'.
> ZnBase64EncoderTests debug: #'testEmpty'.
> ZnServerTests debug: #'testSessionExpired'.
> ZnCharacterEncoderTests debug: #'testBeLenient'.
> ZnStaticFileServerDelegateTests debug: #'testIfModifiedSinceNotModified'.
> ZnServerTests debug: #'testSessionRoute'.
> **************************************************************************************
>
> If you're ready to share your work, I can merge your branch into the glassdb zinc gemstone2.4 branch and then we can start picking off the remaining tests at our liesure ...
>
> For the new extension methods for GLASS, I will integrate those into GLASS 1.0-beta.9.1 (#development).
>
> I will also get serious about moving the GLASS packages up to to github, so one can easily extend the base packages as needed ...
>
> Regarding the monticello meta data ... I am getting real close to eliminating it since it pretty much only adds to the conflict noise in github ... since we're moving to git, we should rely on git for that information ...  
>
> I'm starting to add basic git support to tODE[2] and Thierry Goubier is exploring additional git tools for Pharo2.0[3] and I intend to follow his lead in adding additional tODE-based tools for working with git...
>
> Dale
>
> [1] https://travis-ci.org/jbrichau/zinc/jobs/8134570
> [2] https://github.com/dalehenrich/tode
> [3] https://github.com/dalehenrich/filetree/tree/pharo2.0/repository/MonticelloFileTree-Git.package
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion" <[hidden email]>
> | Sent: Sunday, June 16, 2013 7:54:59 AM
> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
> |
> | Allright, I think I made good progress porting Zinc 2.3.2 to GLASS:
> |
> | 248 run, 238 passes, 4 expected defects, 6 failures, 0 errors, 0
> | unexpected passes
> |
> | It's now only in my fork on https://github.com/jbrichau/zinc
> |  (gemstone2.4 branch)
> | We should discuss the two issues I added to the issue list (and
> | mentioned in this commit:
> | https://github.com/jbrichau/zinc/commit/723d21faa9b5e258e09c2395ecf8b040d28b0b1d
> | )
> |
> | The remaining failures are a bit more tricky... so I am giving it a
> | rest for the remainder of the day.
> |
> | Johan
> |
> | On 16 Jun 2013, at 10:55, Johan Brichau <[hidden email]> wrote:
> |
> | > I worked my way through the commit conflicts.
> | > Seems like we need a tool that uses information from the filetree
> | > format to help in these things. Changed methods and changed
> | > methodproperties files correlate and can help in resolving the
> | > conflict. In addition, it seems preferable to adapt the
> | > methodproperties accordingly to the chosen method version in the
> | > merge.
> | >
> | > Everything was now pushed to my fork and I should still look at the
> | > orphaned methods.
> | >
> | > Now setting up Travis for my account...
> | >
> | > On 15 Jun 2013, at 22:32, Dale K. Henrichs
> | > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> | >
> | >> I haven't actually looked at the merge results ... Sven mentioned
> | >> that he had done a bunch of package renames ... the package
> | >> renames _should_ end up handled by git as a file rename and not a
> | >> conflict ... when you mentioned a lot of changes, I just assumed
> | >> the worst ...
> | >>
> | >> Glad to hear that there are mostly benign changes ... the dang
> | >> newlines are a persistent problem that I need to figure out (for
> | >> GemStone) ... I'm pretty sure that there were package renames, so
> | >> the BaselineOf will probably need to be changed ... also look for
> | >> "orhpaned methods" (methods that were added for GemStone and left
> | >> behind by the package rename ...
> | >>
> | >> If you are making good progress then I don't need to look until
> | >> you get down to the end:)
> | >>
> | >> Dale
> | >> ----- Original Message -----
> | >> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
> | >> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
> | >> | <[hidden email]>
> | >> | Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 12:21:36 PM
> | >> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
> | >> |
> | >> | Dale,
> | >> |
> | >> | Just to be sure: I used git merge to merge the branches and I am
> | >> | now
> | >> | working my way through the conflicts. They mostly seem to be the
> | >> | missing newline at the end of methods and the
> | >> | methodProperties.json.
> | >> | If you mention there were a lot of real conflicting changes, I
> | >> | am
> | >> | suspicious if git merge is really giving me a good end-result
> | >> | here.
> | >> |
> | >> | Now that I come to think of it... git merge is not going to
> | >> | signal me
> | >> | if the same method was changed, like monticello does. So: are
> | >> | you
> | >> | using monticello merge over filetree repositories or are you
> | >> | using
> | >> | git merge to do this kind of work?
> | >> |
> | >> | Johan
> | >> |
> | >> | On 15 Jun 2013, at 20:59, "Dale K. Henrichs"
> | >> | <[hidden email]> wrote:
> | >> |
> | >> | > Johan,
> | >> | >
> | >> | > Yep that's the model ... and now you see why I wasn't so fast
> | >> | > to
> | >> | > merge Sven's changes at the time he published them ... If I
> | >> | > recall
> | >> | > correctly, Sven renamed a bunch of packages (it is possible
> | >> | > that
> | >> | > he did more than that as well?) ....
> | >> | >
> | >> | > If you push your work up to github (perhaps on a branch off of
> | >> | > master) I can look at the diffs and help plan a course of
> | >> | > action
> | >> | > (inline comments).
> | >> | >
> | >> | > It may turn out to be easier to backport the GemStone specific
> | >> | > changes than to merge the new work back into GemStone ...
> | >> | >
> | >> | > Dale
> | >> | >
> | >> | > ----- Original Message -----
> | >> | > | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
> | >> | > | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
> | >> | > | <[hidden email]>
> | >> | > | Sent: Saturday, June 15, 2013 11:36:15 AM
> | >> | > | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | So, now that I am this far, I think it's worth doing
> | >> | > | something
> | >> | > | more
> | >> | > | substantial than my existing pull request (which, strangely,
> | >> | > | was
> | >> | > | the
> | >> | > | only failing test in my case -- different from travis
> | >> | > | build?)
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | Since the version difference of Zinc between Pharo and GLASS
> | >> | > | is a
> | >> | > | bit
> | >> | > | of a hurdle, I thought it would be good to pull in Sven's
> | >> | > | latest
> | >> | > | changes. It's not the latest version in Pharo but it's a
> | >> | > | good
> | >> | > | step.
> | >> | > | How does one go about this? Is there a specific workflow
> | >> | > | that
> | >> | > | works
> | >> | > | well for Smalltalk projects and are there conventions to be
> | >> | > | followed?
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | I fetched Sven's repository and merged it into my local fork
> | >> | > | of
> | >> | > | the
> | >> | > | master branch. I am correct that glassdb/zinc/master is
> | >> | > | supposed
> | >> | > | to
> | >> | > | be the copy of the svenc/zinc/master ?
> | >> | > | Next, I merged the master branch into the gemstone2.4 branch
> | >> | > | and,
> | >> | > | obviously, merge conflict hell broke loose. Now looking at
> | >> | > | those...
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | All of this only in my local repo, of course.
> | >> | > | Is this how it's supposed to work?
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | Johan
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | On 14 Jun 2013, at 20:34, Johan Brichau <[hidden email]>
> | >> | > | wrote:
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | > Hi Dale,
> | >> | > | >
> | >> | > | > I finally got to updating my fork by fetching the upstream
> | >> | > | > changes.
> | >> | > | > Seems like travis got to work immediately.
> | >> | > | >
> | >> | > | > Really nice show case for working together. I like it!
> | >> | > | >
> | >> | > | > Johan
> | >> | > | >
> | >> | > | > On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:46, Dale K. Henrichs
> | >> | > | > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> | >> | > | >
> | >> | > | >> I think it's the missing .travis.yml file ... the travis
> | >> | > | >> builds
> | >> | > | >> should be triggered whether or not the commit can be
> | >> | > | >> merged
> | >> | > | >> automatically ... another possibility is that the pull
> | >> | > | >> request
> | >> | > | >> was created before I enabled the travis builds, or ...
> | >> | > | >>
> | >> | > | >> We'll try a new pull request if the merge doesn't work...
> | >> | > | >>
> | >> | > | >> Dale
> | >> | > | >>
> | >> | > | >> ----- Original Message -----
> | >> | > | >> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
> | >> | > | >> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
> | >> | > | >> | <[hidden email]>
> | >> | > | >> | Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 6:20:56 AM
> | >> | > | >> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
> | >> | > | >> |
> | >> | > | >> | I think it is because the pull request could not be
> | >> | > | >> | merged
> | >> | > | >> | automatically ?
> | >> | > | >> |
> | >> | > | >> | Ok... will look into this
> | >> | > | >> | As I said, it's already a few months old, so I need to
> | >> | > | >> | update it
> | >> | > | >> |
> | >> | > | >> | On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:15, Johan Brichau
> | >> | > | >> | <[hidden email]>
> | >> | > | >> | wrote:
> | >> | > | >> |
> | >> | > | >> | > Dale,
> | >> | > | >> | >
> | >> | > | >> | > I did a change to the pull request but nothing
> | >> | > | >> | > happened.
> | >> | > | >> | >
> | >> | > | >> | > I have never used travis-CI, so what should I do more
> | >> | > | >> | > to
> | >> | > | >> | > trigger
> | >> | > | >> | > the build here?
> | >> | > | >> | >
> | >> | > | >> | > On 05 Jun 2013, at 15:05, "Dale K. Henrichs"
> | >> | > | >> | > <[hidden email]> wrote:
> | >> | > | >> | >
> | >> | > | >> | >> Johan,
> | >> | > | >> | >>
> | >> | > | >> | >> No nothing broken and I have not even looked at the
> | >> | > | >> | >> commit
> | >> | > | >> | >> ... I
> | >> | > | >> | >> just figured that a pull request on your part (or
> | >> | > | >> | >> Ken's)
> | >> | > | >> | >> will
> | >> | > | >> | >> get
> | >> | > | >> | >> things started.
> | >> | > | >> | >>
> | >> | > | >> | >> We are all busy, but if we start leveraging github
> | >> | > | >> | >> and
> | >> | > | >> | >> travis-ci I
> | >> | > | >> | >> think we will be more efficient in managing
> | >> | > | >> | >> contributions
> | >> | > | >> | >> ...
> | >> | > | >> | >> folks can contribute a patch for a single test and
> | >> | > | >> | >> the
> | >> | > | >> | >> whole
> | >> | > | >> | >> community can track progress towards green tests ...
> | >> | > | >> | >>
> | >> | > | >> | >> Dale
> | >> | > | >> | >>
> | >> | > | >> | >> ----- Original Message -----
> | >> | > | >> | >> | From: "Johan Brichau" <[hidden email]>
> | >> | > | >> | >> | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
> | >> | > | >> | >> | <[hidden email]>
> | >> | > | >> | >> | Sent: Tuesday, June 4, 2013 12:28:11 PM
> | >> | > | >> | >> | Subject: Re: [GS/SS Beta] GitHub and Zinc
> | >> | > | >> | >> |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | Hi Dale,
> | >> | > | >> | >> |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | Thanks for pulling the rope here.
> | >> | > | >> | >> |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | I made a benign change... did that do something?
> | >> | > | >> | >> | Mind that I noticed how the commit also showed a
> | >> | > | >> | >> | lot
> | >> | > | >> | >> | more
> | >> | > | >> | >> | changed
> | >> | > | >> | >> | lines than what I actually changed. Seems like a
> | >> | > | >> | >> | filetree
> | >> | > | >> | >> | issue.
> | >> | > | >> | >> |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | This was already quite some time ago. I will take
> | >> | > | >> | >> | a
> | >> | > | >> | >> | look
> | >> | > | >> | >> | soon to
> | >> | > | >> | >> | create a new pull request.
> | >> | > | >> | >> |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | ps: yes, we are using this version of Zinc in
> | >> | > | >> | >> | production
> | >> | > | >> | >> | and
> | >> | > | >> | >> | it's
> | >> | > | >> | >> | working very well. The failing tests are not
> | >> | > | >> | >> | harming us
> | >> | > | >> | >> | and
> | >> | > | >> | >> | we
> | >> | > | >> | >> | were
> | >> | > | >> | >> | already anticipating that we should bring the
> | >> | > | >> | >> | gemstone
> | >> | > | >> | >> | port
> | >> | > | >> | >> | up
> | >> | > | >> | >> | to
> | >> | > | >> | >> | speed with the current status in Pharo. hence...
> | >> | > | >> | >> |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | On 03 Jun 2013, at 21:43, Dale K. Henrichs
> | >> | > | >> | >> | <[hidden email]> wrote:
> | >> | > | >> | >> |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > Johan,
> | >> | > | >> | >> | >
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > You have an existing pull request for Zinc. If
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > you
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > make a
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > benign
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > change and do a new commit on your branch and
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > then
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > push
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > that
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > commit to GitHub it will trigger a travisCI
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > build ...
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > it
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > will
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > make
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > a nice example of how pull requests and travis
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > work
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > together
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > ...
> | >> | > | >> | >> | >
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > Dale
> | >> | > | >> | >> | >
> | >> | > | >> | >> | >
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > ----- Original Message -----
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | From: "Dale K. Henrichs"
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | <[hidden email]>
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | To: "GemStone Seaside beta discussion"
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | <[hidden email]>
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | Sent: Monday, June 3, 2013 12:05:19 PM
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | Subject: GitHub and Zinc
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | As you probably all know, I've spent the bulk
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | of
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | the
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | last
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | year or
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | so
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | working on GitHub, TravisCI, FileTree,
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | Metacello
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | and
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | tODE.
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | My
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | primary motivation has been to improve the
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | collaboration
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | experience
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | for GLASS.
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | Recently I have had the opportunity to
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | collaborate
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | with
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | Christophe
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | Demarey on porting the Metacello Preview to
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | Pharo2.0
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | leveraging
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | the
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | collaboration facilities available on GitHub
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | and
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | TravisCI.
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | The
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | effort has been very successful and I think it
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | is
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | time
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | to
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | start
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | leveraging GitHub and TravisCI for GLASS
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | development.
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | John's bug report this morning makes me think
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | that
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | the
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | Zinc
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | project
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | will be a good first step to working out the
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | kinks
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | in
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | using
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | GitHub/TravisCI.
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | I have just now finished setting up the Zinc
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | project to
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | automatically
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | run TravisCI builds for all commits/pull
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | requests[1].
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | The
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | tests
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | are
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | failing on both gemstone2.4 and gemstone3.1
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | branches,
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | but I
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | assume
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | that folks are actually using Zinc in
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | production
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | and
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | have
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | either
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | got
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | fixes for some of the test failures, or the
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | tests
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | are
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | failing in
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | benign ways ...
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | For gemstone2.4 the following tests are
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | failing:
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | Results for anArray( 'BaselineOfZinc') Test
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | Suite
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | 240 run, 232 passes, 4 expected defects, 4
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | failures, 0
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | errors, 0
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | unexpected passes
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | *** FAILURES *******************
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug:
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | #'testCookiesForUrl'.
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug:
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | #'testCookieAtForUrl'.
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieJarTests debug: #'testAdd'.
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | ZnMagicCookieTests debug: #'testFromString'.
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | **************************************************************************************
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | For gemstone3.1 the same tests are failing
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | along
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | with a
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | bunch of
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | errors[2].
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | Ken has a fork of gemstone3.1 and I am
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | suspicious
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | that
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | his
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | branch
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | may
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | have fixes for many of the gemstone3.1
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | issues/errors.
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | Johan
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | has a
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | fork of gemstone2.4 with a fix for a
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | particular
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | test.
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | We
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | have
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | Johns'
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | bug report. We have new checkins from Sven
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | that
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | have
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | yet to
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | be
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | integrated.
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | The fork/pull request model on GitHub works
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | very
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | well
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | for
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | submitting
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | updates for inclusion in the main repository:
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |   - tests are run with TravisCI
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |   - and the changes made in pull request can
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |   be
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |   reviewed
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |   with
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |   comments
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | So a green run combined with a clean code
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | review,
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | means
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | that
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | fixes
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | can be merged into the release branch and
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | folks can
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | feel
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | comfortable
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | either using the branch directly or
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | integrating
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | into
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | their
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | own
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | forks.
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | Moving forward their are additional projects
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | like
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | porting
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | Seaside3.1
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | to GemStone that we can collaborate on. Paul
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | and I
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | have
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | already
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | started on the project, but haven't touched in
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | the
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | last
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | couple of
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | weeks[3]&[4]. Presumably there is also
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | interest in
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | getting
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | Zodiac[4]
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | ported to GemStone as well...
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | The code is all being managed in the glassdb
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | organization on
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | GitHub
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | and I can add GLASS developers to the
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | organization
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | so
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | that I
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | won't
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | be the only person with the ability to approve
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | pull
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | requests
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | ...
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | getting me off the critical path for doing
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | integration
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | ..
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | I'm not thinking that everyone will drop what
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | they
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | are
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | doing
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | and
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | start work in Zinc (myself I'm preparing for a
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | STIC
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | talk
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | next
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | week
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | so I'm not going to be able to do too much
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | between
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | now
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | and
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | then),
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | but we can start talking about the mechanics
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | and
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | when
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | folks
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | find
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | opportunities to contribute we'll have an idea
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | how
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | we
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | want
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | to
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | proceed.
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | Dale
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | [1] https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | [2]
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | https://travis-ci.org/glassdb/zinc/jobs/7744348#L128
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | [3] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside30
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | [4] https://github.com/glassdb/Seaside31
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > | [5] https://github.com/glassdb/zodiac
> | >> | > | >> | >> | > |
> | >> | > | >> | >> |
> | >> | > | >> | >> |
> | >> | > | >> | >
> | >> | > | >> |
> | >> | > | >> |
> | >> | > | >
> | >> | > |
> | >> | > |
> | >> |
> | >> |
> | >
> |
> |