Re: GitHub survey on open source projects
Locked
Re: GitHub survey on open source projects
 
|
Re: GitHub survey on open source projects
|
|
Re: GitHub survey on open source projects
|
|
Re: GitHub survey on open source projects
|
|
Re: GitHub survey on open source projects
|
|
In reply to this post by NorbertHartl
I don't want to rain in this parade but I think this action will only bring us to the level of survey...
We need to go further and see ways of enticing newcomers, knowledgeable folks and gurus of Pharo to not only start a process of "no new functionality without proper docs" attitude (something already put in this list, albeit in the quality for delivery process), but also do a clean up of documents scattered about Pharo specially tutorials e and package manuals in order the "user experience" (in fact the [new] developer experience) could rise above the perception of the other languages and platforms.
I do know this is felt by a lot of people as diverting our scarce resources for the development of new (cool) things in Pharo.
Also, the attitude (which was presented as a joke I surmise) about having access to code and the "fenomenal" IDE is no longer sufficient in the complex new environment we need to live at in order to thrive Pharo.
We've a conundrum today: the "image is everything" (including the kitchen sink
 ) of yore has been replaced by the need of living in a complex OS (be it whichever, Linux, Mac ilks, or Microsoft solutions), the Internet is a new paradigm where we'd to adapt not be part of infrastructure, in the same token we've moved to GitHub a public (but not based in Smalltalk) infrastructure for versioning, etc.So if the language/environment does not shine vis a vis other "competitors" we'll be relegated to "niche languages" or "cultural languages" which are "nice to know but not are mainstream", and other sayings I believe all folks at this list already heard/read.
The problem is that we need to create the culture and avoid shortcuts as to avoid a problem I already saw in the past:
Let's we 'automate' in our tools that a new class cannot be <put here the verb you find appropriate> (going from saving to publishing) without the comment documenting it, and voilá, we'll find that a cookie cutter comment to spread as a weed as more and more collaborators 'too busy' to comment 'small classes' (which the code is enough for understanding, etc., etc.) in the forthcoming editions of Pharo...!
Or worse, as more and more the code gets complex instead the comments to explain the code they become an English description of the initial release of the code and then as time goes by they get out of sync...
Again, only culture [change] can bring it to a good term.
As a positive advocacy of this cause, I find _fantastic_ the discussions and the finesse we go in the correct naming of selectors and methods for Pharo classes!!
I think we should develop a kind of OCD for this in the comments as well!
My 0.01999999....
--
Cesar Rabak
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 11:17:59 +0200 From: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]> To: Pharo Development List <[hidden email]> Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] GitHub survey on open source projects Message-ID: <CAMynPtwcGZv2KO==PeKxU=wwDMd7WRjY0TgVEHcqKFG=[hidden email]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" I'd not say that because we have docs, but scattered docs. A good consortium idea would be to hire a real technical writer and give him/her the ton of docs we have so that we can get it all in a Pillar format and with more complete coverage. Phil On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 9:52 AM, Norbert Hartl <[hidden email]> wrote: > ??? The only thing that fits us is "plagued by poor docs"!!! > > Norbert > > Am 19.06.2017 um 20:05 schrieb Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]>: > > Not sure how much this reflects our communities but this is interesting. > > > GitHub Survey: Open Source Is Popular, Plagued by Poor Docs and Rude People > > https://adtmag.com/articles/2017/06/05/open-source-survey.aspx > <https://adtmag.com/articles/2017/06/05/open-source-survey.aspx?m=1> > > _,,,^..^,,,_ > > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-dev_lists.pharo.org/attachments/20170620/19202350/attachment-0001.html> ------------------------------ Message: 10 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 12:54:26 +0000 From: J?r?mie Regnault <[hidden email]> To: "[hidden email]" <[hidden email]> Subject: [Pharo-dev] How can I save changes on memory ? Message-ID: <[hidden email]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Hi, I would like to know how to save modifications (e.g creating a class/method ) in the memory. Have a nice day, -- J?r?mie Regnault ------------------------------ Message: 11 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 15:10:49 +0200 From: Cl?ment Bera <[hidden email]> To: Discusses Development of Pharo <[hidden email]> Cc: Thierry Goubier <[hidden email]> Subject: [Pharo-dev] Working OSProcess configuration for Pharo 6 release (please) Message-ID: <[hidden email]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Hi Thierry, hi all, The Pharo catalog version of OSProcess is not working in the Pharo 6 release and I need to load OSProcess in one of my projects. I cannot load OSSubProcess instead, so no need to answer this mail talking about it. In-between version 2231 and 2241 of VMMaker, the vm parameter 1002 (os version), has changed on Mac from '1011.6' to '10.11.6'. OSProcess tests the version number against 1000, and should now test against 10. I checked the SqueakSource repo of OSProcess, I can see that the last version is 4.6.8 and the catalog configuration loads an older version, but I cannot see any fix related to the version number ? Can someone update the OSProcess configuration in the Pharo catalog so that it loads a working version in the Pharo 6 release or point me to an OSProcess configuration, outside of the catalog, which works in the release of Pharo 6 please ? Thank you very much. Clement -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-dev_lists.pharo.org/attachments/20170620/450f55a3/attachment-0001.html> ------------------------------ Message: 12 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 08:04:45 -0700 From: Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> To: Pharo Development List <[hidden email]> Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] Working OSProcess configuration for Pharo 6 release (please) Message-ID: <[hidden email]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Hi Cl?ment > On Jun 20, 2017, at 6:10 AM, Cl?ment Bera <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Hi Thierry, hi all, > > The Pharo catalog version of OSProcess is not working in the Pharo 6 release and I need to load OSProcess in one of my projects. I cannot load OSSubProcess instead, so no need to answer this mail talking about it. > > In-between version 2231 and 2241 of VMMaker, the vm parameter 1002 (os version), has changed on Mac from '1011.6' to '10.11.6'. OSProcess tests the version number against 1000, and should now test against 10. That was a mistake of mine. In the current VM it now answers e.g. 1011.6 and so things should be working again. > > I checked the SqueakSource repo of OSProcess, I can see that the last version is 4.6.8 and the catalog configuration loads an older version, but I cannot see any fix related to the version number ? > > Can someone update the OSProcess configuration in the Pharo catalog so that it loads a working version in the Pharo 6 release or point me to an OSProcess configuration, outside of the catalog, which works in the release of Pharo 6 please ? > > Thank you very much. > > Clement ------------------------------ Message: 13 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 17:06:40 +0200 From: Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> To: Pharo Development List <[hidden email]> Cc: Thierry Goubier <[hidden email]> Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] Working OSProcess configuration for Pharo 6 release (please) Message-ID: <[hidden email]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Hell, I think the newest VM already has a fix to work like before, so no change the OSProcess is needed: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/20156/OSPlatform-current-returns-a-MacOSPlatform-instead-of-a-MacOSXPlatform-on-macOS-Sierra <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/20156/OSPlatform-current-returns-a-MacOSPlatform-instead-of-a-MacOSXPlatform-on-macOS-Sierra> > On 20 Jun 2017, at 15:10, Cl?ment Bera <[hidden email]> wrote: > > Hi Thierry, hi all, > > The Pharo catalog version of OSProcess is not working in the Pharo 6 release and I need to load OSProcess in one of my projects. I cannot load OSSubProcess instead, so no need to answer this mail talking about it. > > In-between version 2231 and 2241 of VMMaker, the vm parameter 1002 (os version), has changed on Mac from '1011.6' to '10.11.6'. OSProcess tests the version number against 1000, and should now test against 10. > > I checked the SqueakSource repo of OSProcess, I can see that the last version is 4.6.8 and the catalog configuration loads an older version, but I cannot see any fix related to the version number ? > > Can someone update the OSProcess configuration in the Pharo catalog so that it loads a working version in the Pharo 6 release or point me to an OSProcess configuration, outside of the catalog, which works in the release of Pharo 6 please ? > > Thank you very much. > > Clement -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-dev_lists.pharo.org/attachments/20170620/3d23ab14/attachment-0001.html> ------------------------------ Message: 14 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 17:08:35 +0200 From: Cyril Ferlicot <[hidden email]> To: Pharo Development List <[hidden email]> Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] Working OSProcess configuration for Pharo 6 release (please) Message-ID: <CAMyorgBfSy-PZuMmh=+[hidden email]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi Cl?ment > > > That was a mistake of mine. In the current VM it now answers e.g. 1011.6 and so things should be working again. > Hi! The problem is that the stable vm does not have the fix and the current latest vm is **reeeeeeeeally* slow. It happens at least on OSX. I don't know if it is a known problem or if it comes from the opensmalltalk build or the pharo build. I got the VM here: http://files.pharo.org/vm/pharo-spur32/mac/ -- Cyril Ferlicot https://ferlicot.fr http://www.synectique.eu 2 rue Jacques Pr?vert 01, 59650 Villeneuve d'ascq France ------------------------------ Message: 15 Date: Tue, 20 Jun 2017 17:51:06 +0200 From: Cl?ment Bera <[hidden email]> To: Pharo Development List <[hidden email]> Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] Working OSProcess configuration for Pharo 6 release (please) Message-ID: <CAJrdCbXP9AGABXhdM=[hidden email]> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Ok. Maybe when things are fixed we should update the Pharo 6 release version (the one-click) to have a version with OSProcess working. Cyril the production Pharo VM are now generated from opensmalltalk-vm. There is no separate Pharo build. Just saying to avoid fireworks. On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 5:08 PM, Cyril Ferlicot <[hidden email]> wrote: > On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 5:04 PM, Eliot Miranda <[hidden email]> > wrote: > > Hi Cl?ment > > > > > > That was a mistake of mine. In the current VM it now answers e.g. > 1011.6 and so things should be working again. > > > > Hi! > > The problem is that the stable vm does not have the fix and the > current latest vm is **reeeeeeeeally* slow. It happens at least on > OSX. I don't know if it is a known problem or if it comes from the > opensmalltalk build or the pharo build. > > I got the VM here: http://files.pharo.org/vm/pharo-spur32/mac/ > > > > -- > Cyril Ferlicot > https://ferlicot.fr > > http://www.synectique.eu > 2 rue Jacques Pr?vert 01, > 59650 Villeneuve d'ascq France > > An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-dev_lists.pharo.org/attachments/20170620/5990ea31/attachment-0001.html> ------------------------------ Subject: Digest Footer _______________________________________________ Pharo-dev mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.pharo.org/mailman/listinfo/pharo-dev_lists.pharo.org ------------------------------ End of Pharo-dev Digest, Vol 50, Issue 24 ***************************************** |
Re: GitHub survey on open source projects
|
|
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |