Smalltalk › Squeak › Squeak - Dev

Roadmap proposal for 3.10/4.0

_‹ Previous Topic Next Topic _›

Classic

List

Threaded

44 messages Options

123

Marcus Denker

Re: open process issues (was: Roadmap proposal for 3.10/4.0)

On 24.10.2006, at 22:27, Lex Spoon wrote:

> Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> writes:
>> I added this improved SharedQueue as SharedQueue2 to 3.9 very early:
>>
>> | MarcusDenker 10-07-05 18:09 in 3.9 for further testing
>>
>> Sadly, nobody tested it.
>
> Right. As a result of this process, Squeak ends up using the
> known-broken code instead of the tested, believed-fixed code.
>

If it was tested, why not communicate it?

> Strange, no? Everyone involved does good work, and we end up in a
> situation like this.
>

Actually, there was a last "ok, this works" missing. If it was so
important,
why didn't you add a comment to mantis or send a mail? Fixes and
especially
anhancements need to be actively supported, especially by their
creators.

In this case it was *only* missing this last "please add this, I
tested it in 3.9a, it works".

Marcus

Lex Spoon

Re: open process issues

In reply to this post by Ken Causey-3

Ken Causey <[hidden email]> writes:

> Well it should be noted that this is a complete list of all 'official'
> teams which is a mixture of Steward Teams (those who have accepted
> responsibility for some part of the Basic Squeak Image) and other teams
> like the Website team and future/speculative teams. Any team that is
> responsible for some part of the image should have 'Stewards' as part of
> the name and the description should list the Class Categories in the
> image for which that team is responsible. For example:
>
> Morphic Stewards - Maintaining the Morphic- category of classes in the
> Basic Squeak Image

Okay, I'll start thinking of maintainership as you describe. It looks
like a good approach to me.

This leaves another thorny question, of course: what *does* happen
with code that has no stewarding team? Does it not get bug fixes?
Does Marcus simply get it dumped on his head to sort out? Maybe
that's the best kind of approach that is possible.

-Lex

Lex Spoon

Re: open process issues (was: Roadmap proposal for 3.10/4.0)

In reply to this post by Marcus Denker

Marcus Denker <[hidden email]> writes:
> In this case it was *only* missing this last "please add this, I
> tested it in 3.9a, it works".

Right, sure. To be clear, I actually was not criticizing your and
whoever else's individual decisions in this case. You've obviously
done a huge amount of work for Squeak, and the parts I know about are
very well done.

I am simply saying that the level of process and testing required is
stiffling out some changes. If you do not have months to campaign and
write tests and followup with bug-tracking discussions, it is hard to
get a patch into Squeak. In a word, for good or for ill, Squeak is
very conservative these days, at least with its core image.

-Lex

Ken Causey-3

Re: open process issues

In reply to this post by Lex Spoon

On Wed, 2006-10-25 at 12:54 -0700, Lex Spoon wrote:

> Ken Causey <[hidden email]> writes:
> > Well it should be noted that this is a complete list of all 'official'
> > teams which is a mixture of Steward Teams (those who have accepted
> > responsibility for some part of the Basic Squeak Image) and other teams
> > like the Website team and future/speculative teams. Any team that is
> > responsible for some part of the image should have 'Stewards' as part of
> > the name and the description should list the Class Categories in the
> > image for which that team is responsible. For example:
> >
> > Morphic Stewards - Maintaining the Morphic- category of classes in the
> > Basic Squeak Image
>
> Okay, I'll start thinking of maintainership as you describe. It looks
> like a good approach to me.
>
> This leaves another thorny question, of course: what *does* happen
> with code that has no stewarding team? Does it not get bug fixes?
> Does Marcus simply get it dumped on his head to sort out? Maybe
> that's the best kind of approach that is possible.
>
>
> -Lex

Yes, if a change is fundamentally related to a class category for which
there is no stewards team then the responsibility falls back on the
release team. Clearly the forming of steward teams has not progressed
as quickly as hoped.

Of course anyone who cares to spend a quiet afternoon Squeaking is more
than welcome to grab a bug or two and post fixes to the appropriate
Mantis reports. This would at least lower the workload for the release
team. But then we all dream from time to time. ;)

Ken

signature.asc (196 bytes) Download Attachment

123