So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
Locked
12
12
So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
 
|
We said that for middle May we were going to freeze 1.1. This means, no more new features or refactors. Just bug fixes. So, the next steps can be:
- Release a PharoCore1.1 with the last version we have so far tagged as alpha1 (please, put this tag in the zip, .image and .changes). This may be, for example: Pharo-1.1-11360-alpha1.image - Build and release a Pharo 1.1 alpha1 based on such core (now we have almost all dev tools working well in 1.1) - Make publish all new VMs (for each OS) Then the idea is that people/developers start to play with Pharo 1.1. It may be quite unstable as this is the first release for 1.1. People should try to load their own packages, adapt them (if necessary) to 1.1, and report all issues they find (and fixes!!). But they should keep in mind this the first alpha ;) With these, we will be testing: new VMs, PharoCore, PharoDev tools, and external packages (from other people). Pharo team at the same time, continues to work, fixing and integrating. We make new versions as we have been doing so far. When we consider, we release an alpha2....then beta, then RC and finally Pharo 1.1. now...do you think there is an issue that is so important to be fixed/included in the first Pharo1.1 even being a first alpha ? Cheers Mariano _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
|
|
We are basically ready
Waiting for feedback on network. Stef On May 16, 2010, at 3:48 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > We said that for middle May we were going to freeze 1.1. This means, no more new features or refactors. Just bug fixes. So, the next steps can be: > > - Release a PharoCore1.1 with the last version we have so far tagged as alpha1 (please, put this tag in the zip, .image and .changes). This may be, for example: Pharo-1.1-11360-alpha1.image > - Build and release a Pharo 1.1 alpha1 based on such core (now we have almost all dev tools working well in 1.1) > - Make publish all new VMs (for each OS) > > Then the idea is that people/developers start to play with Pharo 1.1. It may be quite unstable as this is the first release for 1.1. People should try to load their own packages, adapt them (if necessary) to 1.1, and report all issues they find (and fixes!!). But they should keep in mind this the first alpha ;) > > With these, we will be testing: new VMs, PharoCore, PharoDev tools, and external packages (from other people). > > Pharo team at the same time, continues to work, fixing and integrating. We make new versions as we have been doing so far. When we consider, we release an alpha2....then beta, then RC and finally Pharo 1.1. > > now...do you think there is an issue that is so important to be fixed/included in the first Pharo1.1 even being a first alpha ? > > Cheers > > Mariano > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
|
|
Mariano,
What is needed for Pharo 1.1? Not much I feel. I produced yesterday a Pharo1.1 from a core, and it works perfectly, including condenseChange. Cheers, Alexandre On 16 May 2010, at 11:14, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > We are basically ready > Waiting for feedback on network. > > Stef > > > On May 16, 2010, at 3:48 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > >> We said that for middle May we were going to freeze 1.1. This means, no more new features or refactors. Just bug fixes. So, the next steps can be: >> >> - Release a PharoCore1.1 with the last version we have so far tagged as alpha1 (please, put this tag in the zip, .image and .changes). This may be, for example: Pharo-1.1-11360-alpha1.image >> - Build and release a Pharo 1.1 alpha1 based on such core (now we have almost all dev tools working well in 1.1) >> - Make publish all new VMs (for each OS) >> >> Then the idea is that people/developers start to play with Pharo 1.1. It may be quite unstable as this is the first release for 1.1. People should try to load their own packages, adapt them (if necessary) to 1.1, and report all issues they find (and fixes!!). But they should keep in mind this the first alpha ;) >> >> With these, we will be testing: new VMs, PharoCore, PharoDev tools, and external packages (from other people). >> >> Pharo team at the same time, continues to work, fixing and integrating. We make new versions as we have been doing so far. When we consider, we release an alpha2....then beta, then RC and finally Pharo 1.1. >> >> now...do you think there is an issue that is so important to be fixed/included in the first Pharo1.1 even being a first alpha ? >> >> Cheers >> >> Mariano >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
|
|
check the network problem.
But we can release rc1 anytime now. Stef On May 16, 2010, at 11:00 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote: > Mariano, > > What is needed for Pharo 1.1? Not much I feel. I produced yesterday a Pharo1.1 from a core, and it works perfectly, including condenseChange. > > Cheers, > Alexandre > > > On 16 May 2010, at 11:14, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > >> We are basically ready >> Waiting for feedback on network. >> >> Stef >> >> >> On May 16, 2010, at 3:48 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >> >>> We said that for middle May we were going to freeze 1.1. This means, no more new features or refactors. Just bug fixes. So, the next steps can be: >>> >>> - Release a PharoCore1.1 with the last version we have so far tagged as alpha1 (please, put this tag in the zip, .image and .changes). This may be, for example: Pharo-1.1-11360-alpha1.image >>> - Build and release a Pharo 1.1 alpha1 based on such core (now we have almost all dev tools working well in 1.1) >>> - Make publish all new VMs (for each OS) >>> >>> Then the idea is that people/developers start to play with Pharo 1.1. It may be quite unstable as this is the first release for 1.1. People should try to load their own packages, adapt them (if necessary) to 1.1, and report all issues they find (and fixes!!). But they should keep in mind this the first alpha ;) >>> >>> With these, we will be testing: new VMs, PharoCore, PharoDev tools, and external packages (from other people). >>> >>> Pharo team at the same time, continues to work, fixing and integrating. We make new versions as we have been doing so far. When we consider, we release an alpha2....then beta, then RC and finally Pharo 1.1. >>> >>> now...do you think there is an issue that is so important to be fixed/included in the first Pharo1.1 even being a first alpha ? >>> >>> Cheers >>> >>> Mariano >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
|
|
In reply to this post by Alexandre Bergel-4
On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 11:00 PM, Alexandre Bergel <[hidden email]> wrote: Mariano, No, it doesn't work perfectly ;) All the mails I sent to the mailing list was the "things" I found while building Pharo 1.1. We still have problems with network for example. Not too much indeed. I need to update a little some configurations. I just tested with the new vms and today I was testing how to install external packages like seaside to see if the welcome workspace that explains how to install them deserves an update. What I need is that someone: - Integegrate the remaining fixes and crates a PharoCore-11XXX-alpha1.zip and put it in gforge - to create a section in the website specially for 1.1 where we mention we are in alpha1 blah blah - in that section we include new VMs. - For windows it is the same we have for 1.0: http://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/26814/PharoVM-Win32-4.0.2-bin.zip - For linux: http://squeakvm.org/unix/release/Squeak-4.0.3.2202-linux_i386.tar.gz - For mac we are waiting a new one from John, but for the moment we should use: ftp://ftp.smalltalkconsulting.com/Squeak%204.2.4beta1U.app.zip - Finally we add in that section the Pharo image I build. I have updated my build scripts to work with Pharo 1.1 and I build a dev, So...once those points are done, I just create the image and update it to website. But we will need help from people to test it and report bugs, feedback and all kind of issues. There are still failing and error tests (they are even in PharoCore). Cheers Mariano
_______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
|
|
In reply to this post by Stéphane Ducasse
On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: check the network problem. No, please. We are not in a RC yet. We should first go as alpha, then beta and finally RC. We cannot go in a RC with the first build ever. Cheers Mariano Stef _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
|
|
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
> - Integegrate the remaining fixes and crates a PharoCore-11XXX-alpha1.zip and put it in gforge
I will go over some this week. Alexandre _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
|
|
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
2010/5/17 Mariano Martinez Peck <[hidden email]>:
> > > On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Stéphane Ducasse > <[hidden email]> wrote: >> >> check the network problem. >> But we can release rc1 anytime now. >> > > No, please. We are not in a RC yet. We should first go as alpha, then beta > and finally RC. > We cannot go in a RC with the first build ever. > But sure thing, more testing and packaging won't hurt. > Cheers > > Mariano > > >> -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
|
|
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
On May 16, 2010, at 11:17 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 11:00 PM, Alexandre Bergel <[hidden email]> wrote: > Mariano, > > What is needed for Pharo 1.1? Not much I feel. I produced yesterday a Pharo1.1 from a core, and it works perfectly, including condenseChange. > > > No, it doesn't work perfectly ;) > All the mails I sent to the mailing list was the "things" I found while building Pharo 1.1. > We still have problems with network for example. Where? The ping did not work in 3.9, squeaktrunk, pharo10 and pharo1.1 so :) lukas sent an email last week and we got NO feedback. > Not too much indeed. I need to update a little some configurations. I just tested with the new vms and today I was testing how to install external packages like seaside to see if the welcome workspace that explains how to install them deserves an update. > > What I need is that someone: > > - Integegrate the remaining fixes and crates a PharoCore-11XXX-alpha1.zip and put it in gforge there are none that are showstoppers > - to create a section in the website specially for 1.1 where we mention we are in alpha1 blah blah I started and we should continue > - in that section we include new VMs. > - For windows it is the same we have for 1.0: http://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/26814/PharoVM-Win32-4.0.2-bin.zip > - For linux: http://squeakvm.org/unix/release/Squeak-4.0.3.2202-linux_i386.tar.gz > - For mac we are waiting a new one from John, but for the moment we should use: ftp://ftp.smalltalkconsulting.com/Squeak%204.2.4beta1U.app.zip > - Finally we add in that section the Pharo image I build. > > I have updated my build scripts to work with Pharo 1.1 and I build a dev, Excellent > > So...once those points are done, I just create the image and update it to website. > > But we will need help from people to test it and report bugs, feedback and all kind of issues. There are still failing and error tests (they are even in PharoCore). > > Cheers > > Mariano > > > Cheers, > Alexandre > > > On 16 May 2010, at 11:14, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > > > We are basically ready > > Waiting for feedback on network. > > > > Stef > > > > > > On May 16, 2010, at 3:48 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > >> We said that for middle May we were going to freeze 1.1. This means, no more new features or refactors. Just bug fixes. So, the next steps can be: > >> > >> - Release a PharoCore1.1 with the last version we have so far tagged as alpha1 (please, put this tag in the zip, .image and .changes). This may be, for example: Pharo-1.1-11360-alpha1.image > >> - Build and release a Pharo 1.1 alpha1 based on such core (now we have almost all dev tools working well in 1.1) > >> - Make publish all new VMs (for each OS) > >> > >> Then the idea is that people/developers start to play with Pharo 1.1. It may be quite unstable as this is the first release for 1.1. People should try to load their own packages, adapt them (if necessary) to 1.1, and report all issues they find (and fixes!!). But they should keep in mind this the first alpha ;) > >> > >> With these, we will be testing: new VMs, PharoCore, PharoDev tools, and external packages (from other people). > >> > >> Pharo team at the same time, continues to work, fixing and integrating. We make new versions as we have been doing so far. When we consider, we release an alpha2....then beta, then RC and finally Pharo 1.1. > >> > >> now...do you think there is an issue that is so important to be fixed/included in the first Pharo1.1 even being a first alpha ? > >> > >> Cheers > >> > >> Mariano > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Pharo-project mailing list > >> [hidden email] > >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pharo-project mailing list > > [hidden email] > > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
|
|
In reply to this post by Mariano Martinez Peck
Unstable is alpha. We called it that way so that people do not start to use it :)
But now we should go beta=releaseCandidate1 Stef On May 16, 2010, at 11:18 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: > check the network problem. > But we can release rc1 anytime now. > > > No, please. We are not in a RC yet. We should first go as alpha, then beta and finally RC. > We cannot go in a RC with the first build ever. > > Cheers > > Mariano > > > Stef > > On May 16, 2010, at 11:00 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote: > > > Mariano, > > > > What is needed for Pharo 1.1? Not much I feel. I produced yesterday a Pharo1.1 from a core, and it works perfectly, including condenseChange. > > > > Cheers, > > Alexandre > > > > > > On 16 May 2010, at 11:14, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > > > >> We are basically ready > >> Waiting for feedback on network. > >> > >> Stef > >> > >> > >> On May 16, 2010, at 3:48 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > >> > >>> We said that for middle May we were going to freeze 1.1. This means, no more new features or refactors. Just bug fixes. So, the next steps can be: > >>> > >>> - Release a PharoCore1.1 with the last version we have so far tagged as alpha1 (please, put this tag in the zip, .image and .changes). This may be, for example: Pharo-1.1-11360-alpha1.image > >>> - Build and release a Pharo 1.1 alpha1 based on such core (now we have almost all dev tools working well in 1.1) > >>> - Make publish all new VMs (for each OS) > >>> > >>> Then the idea is that people/developers start to play with Pharo 1.1. It may be quite unstable as this is the first release for 1.1. People should try to load their own packages, adapt them (if necessary) to 1.1, and report all issues they find (and fixes!!). But they should keep in mind this the first alpha ;) > >>> > >>> With these, we will be testing: new VMs, PharoCore, PharoDev tools, and external packages (from other people). > >>> > >>> Pharo team at the same time, continues to work, fixing and integrating. We make new versions as we have been doing so far. When we consider, we release an alpha2....then beta, then RC and finally Pharo 1.1. > >>> > >>> now...do you think there is an issue that is so important to be fixed/included in the first Pharo1.1 even being a first alpha ? > >>> > >>> Cheers > >>> > >>> Mariano > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> Pharo-project mailing list > >>> [hidden email] > >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Pharo-project mailing list > >> [hidden email] > >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pharo-project mailing list > > [hidden email] > > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
|
|
In reply to this post by Igor Stasenko
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]> wrote: 2010/5/17 Mariano Martinez Peck <[hidden email]>: But conventions are important. Listen the name: RELEASE CANDIDATE! Imagine you are going to download a software which is in RELEASE CANDIDATE and has a lot of problems and bugs....is not good for marketing. So...they are just conventions, but they are important. We cannot say this is a release candidate when we haven't even ever created a PharoDev. For example, did you test it? We are not speaking about core. > Cheers _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
|
|
In reply to this post by Stéphane Ducasse
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: Unstable is alpha. We called it that way so that people do not start to use it :) Ok, we can tag it beta then. But now we should go beta=releaseCandidate1 No, I don't agree. That's not the same. One thing is beta and another thing is a release candidate. Stef _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
|
|
So what do you suggest
beta for two three weeks then rc1 Stef On May 17, 2010, at 10:00 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: > Unstable is alpha. We called it that way so that people do not start to use it :) > > Ok, we can tag it beta then. > > But now we should go beta=releaseCandidate1 > > > No, I don't agree. That's not the same. One thing is beta and another thing is a release candidate. > > > Stef > > On May 16, 2010, at 11:18 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > > > > > On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: > > check the network problem. > > But we can release rc1 anytime now. > > > > > > No, please. We are not in a RC yet. We should first go as alpha, then beta and finally RC. > > We cannot go in a RC with the first build ever. > > > > Cheers > > > > Mariano > > > > > > Stef > > > > On May 16, 2010, at 11:00 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote: > > > > > Mariano, > > > > > > What is needed for Pharo 1.1? Not much I feel. I produced yesterday a Pharo1.1 from a core, and it works perfectly, including condenseChange. > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Alexandre > > > > > > > > > On 16 May 2010, at 11:14, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > > > > > >> We are basically ready > > >> Waiting for feedback on network. > > >> > > >> Stef > > >> > > >> > > >> On May 16, 2010, at 3:48 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > >> > > >>> We said that for middle May we were going to freeze 1.1. This means, no more new features or refactors. Just bug fixes. So, the next steps can be: > > >>> > > >>> - Release a PharoCore1.1 with the last version we have so far tagged as alpha1 (please, put this tag in the zip, .image and .changes). This may be, for example: Pharo-1.1-11360-alpha1.image > > >>> - Build and release a Pharo 1.1 alpha1 based on such core (now we have almost all dev tools working well in 1.1) > > >>> - Make publish all new VMs (for each OS) > > >>> > > >>> Then the idea is that people/developers start to play with Pharo 1.1. It may be quite unstable as this is the first release for 1.1. People should try to load their own packages, adapt them (if necessary) to 1.1, and report all issues they find (and fixes!!). But they should keep in mind this the first alpha ;) > > >>> > > >>> With these, we will be testing: new VMs, PharoCore, PharoDev tools, and external packages (from other people). > > >>> > > >>> Pharo team at the same time, continues to work, fixing and integrating. We make new versions as we have been doing so far. When we consider, we release an alpha2....then beta, then RC and finally Pharo 1.1. > > >>> > > >>> now...do you think there is an issue that is so important to be fixed/included in the first Pharo1.1 even being a first alpha ? > > >>> > > >>> Cheers > > >>> > > >>> Mariano > > >>> _______________________________________________ > > >>> Pharo-project mailing list > > >>> [hidden email] > > >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > >> > > >> > > >> _______________________________________________ > > >> Pharo-project mailing list > > >> [hidden email] > > >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Pharo-project mailing list > > > [hidden email] > > > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pharo-project mailing list > > [hidden email] > > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pharo-project mailing list > > [hidden email] > > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
|
|
what are the exact problems with the network? lukas' email said that
the resolver behaviour had changed positively, not that there was an issue. or did i miss read? thanks, Mike On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 9:21 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: > So what do you suggest > beta for two three weeks > then rc1 > > Stef > > On May 17, 2010, at 10:00 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > >> >> >> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Unstable is alpha. We called it that way so that people do not start to use it :) >> >> Ok, we can tag it beta then. >> >> But now we should go beta=releaseCandidate1 >> >> >> No, I don't agree. That's not the same. One thing is beta and another thing is a release candidate. >> >> >> Stef >> >> On May 16, 2010, at 11:18 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >> >> > >> > >> > On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: >> > check the network problem. >> > But we can release rc1 anytime now. >> > >> > >> > No, please. We are not in a RC yet. We should first go as alpha, then beta and finally RC. >> > We cannot go in a RC with the first build ever. >> > >> > Cheers >> > >> > Mariano >> > >> > >> > Stef >> > >> > On May 16, 2010, at 11:00 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote: >> > >> > > Mariano, >> > > >> > > What is needed for Pharo 1.1? Not much I feel. I produced yesterday a Pharo1.1 from a core, and it works perfectly, including condenseChange. >> > > >> > > Cheers, >> > > Alexandre >> > > >> > > >> > > On 16 May 2010, at 11:14, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >> > > >> > >> We are basically ready >> > >> Waiting for feedback on network. >> > >> >> > >> Stef >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> On May 16, 2010, at 3:48 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >> > >> >> > >>> We said that for middle May we were going to freeze 1.1. This means, no more new features or refactors. Just bug fixes. So, the next steps can be: >> > >>> >> > >>> - Release a PharoCore1.1 with the last version we have so far tagged as alpha1 (please, put this tag in the zip, .image and .changes). This may be, for example: Pharo-1.1-11360-alpha1.image >> > >>> - Build and release a Pharo 1.1 alpha1 based on such core (now we have almost all dev tools working well in 1.1) >> > >>> - Make publish all new VMs (for each OS) >> > >>> >> > >>> Then the idea is that people/developers start to play with Pharo 1.1. It may be quite unstable as this is the first release for 1.1. People should try to load their own packages, adapt them (if necessary) to 1.1, and report all issues they find (and fixes!!). But they should keep in mind this the first alpha ;) >> > >>> >> > >>> With these, we will be testing: new VMs, PharoCore, PharoDev tools, and external packages (from other people). >> > >>> >> > >>> Pharo team at the same time, continues to work, fixing and integrating. We make new versions as we have been doing so far. When we consider, we release an alpha2....then beta, then RC and finally Pharo 1.1. >> > >>> >> > >>> now...do you think there is an issue that is so important to be fixed/included in the first Pharo1.1 even being a first alpha ? >> > >>> >> > >>> Cheers >> > >>> >> > >>> Mariano >> > >>> _______________________________________________ >> > >>> Pharo-project mailing list >> > >>> [hidden email] >> > >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> _______________________________________________ >> > >> Pharo-project mailing list >> > >> [hidden email] >> > >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > >> > > >> > > _______________________________________________ >> > > Pharo-project mailing list >> > > [hidden email] >> > > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Pharo-project mailing list >> > [hidden email] >> > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > >> > _______________________________________________ >> > Pharo-project mailing list >> > [hidden email] >> > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
|
|
On May 17, 2010, at 8:58 PM, Michael Roberts wrote: > what are the exact problems with the network? lukas' email said that > the resolver behaviour had changed positively, not that there was an > issue. or did i miss read? no you did not miss anything. We wanted to check that there was a problem before doing the same rollback that in 1.0. So far nobody reported any problem. So we will turn beta (yes beta) and see. stef > > thanks, > Mike > > On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 9:21 AM, Stéphane Ducasse > <[hidden email]> wrote: >> So what do you suggest >> beta for two three weeks >> then rc1 >> >> Stef >> >> On May 17, 2010, at 10:00 AM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >> >>> >>> >>> On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 9:29 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: >>> Unstable is alpha. We called it that way so that people do not start to use it :) >>> >>> Ok, we can tag it beta then. >>> >>> But now we should go beta=releaseCandidate1 >>> >>> >>> No, I don't agree. That's not the same. One thing is beta and another thing is a release candidate. >>> >>> >>> Stef >>> >>> On May 16, 2010, at 11:18 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 11:16 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote: >>>> check the network problem. >>>> But we can release rc1 anytime now. >>>> >>>> >>>> No, please. We are not in a RC yet. We should first go as alpha, then beta and finally RC. >>>> We cannot go in a RC with the first build ever. >>>> >>>> Cheers >>>> >>>> Mariano >>>> >>>> >>>> Stef >>>> >>>> On May 16, 2010, at 11:00 PM, Alexandre Bergel wrote: >>>> >>>>> Mariano, >>>>> >>>>> What is needed for Pharo 1.1? Not much I feel. I produced yesterday a Pharo1.1 from a core, and it works perfectly, including condenseChange. >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Alexandre >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 16 May 2010, at 11:14, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> We are basically ready >>>>>> Waiting for feedback on network. >>>>>> >>>>>> Stef >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On May 16, 2010, at 3:48 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> We said that for middle May we were going to freeze 1.1. This means, no more new features or refactors. Just bug fixes. So, the next steps can be: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Release a PharoCore1.1 with the last version we have so far tagged as alpha1 (please, put this tag in the zip, .image and .changes). This may be, for example: Pharo-1.1-11360-alpha1.image >>>>>>> - Build and release a Pharo 1.1 alpha1 based on such core (now we have almost all dev tools working well in 1.1) >>>>>>> - Make publish all new VMs (for each OS) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Then the idea is that people/developers start to play with Pharo 1.1. It may be quite unstable as this is the first release for 1.1. People should try to load their own packages, adapt them (if necessary) to 1.1, and report all issues they find (and fixes!!). But they should keep in mind this the first alpha ;) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> With these, we will be testing: new VMs, PharoCore, PharoDev tools, and external packages (from other people). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Pharo team at the same time, continues to work, fixing and integrating. We make new versions as we have been doing so far. When we consider, we release an alpha2....then beta, then RC and finally Pharo 1.1. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> now...do you think there is an issue that is so important to be fixed/included in the first Pharo1.1 even being a first alpha ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cheers >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Mariano >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>>>> [hidden email] >>>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>>> [hidden email] >>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>> [hidden email] >>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>> [hidden email] >>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>> [hidden email] >>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
|
|
In reply to this post by Alexandre Bergel-4
Mariano, Stef, Adrian,
I would like to focus the Pharo sprint this week end on helping Pharo 1.1. In addition to reviewing and fixing the issues tagged as 1.1, are there some particular actions you want to see realized this Saturday? Cheers, Alexandre On 16 May 2010, at 18:26, Alexandre Bergel wrote: >> - Integegrate the remaining fixes and crates a PharoCore-11XXX-alpha1.zip and put it in gforge > > > I will go over some this week. > > Alexandre > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
|
|
Hi Alex,
One thing that bothers me is the network code. Although nobody reported problems I cannot believe that it suddenly works without that we fixed it. The new implementation that is in 1.1 has been reverted in 1.0 and since then we haven't had any complaints. Now in 1.1 I guess that there are not that many people using it yet. If there are people at the sprint with different OS and configurations (Linux vs Mac; IPv4 vs. IPv6), you could try to reproduce the problems that were reported earlier (check the issue tracker). Another valuable help would be to (manually) test the tools, especially the ones loaded into Pharo to make sure we don't have any obvious problems there. Hope you have a productive weekend! Cheers, Adrian On May 18, 2010, at 02:49 , Alexandre Bergel wrote: > Mariano, Stef, Adrian, > > I would like to focus the Pharo sprint this week end on helping Pharo 1.1. > In addition to reviewing and fixing the issues tagged as 1.1, are there some particular actions you want to see realized this Saturday? > > Cheers, > Alexandre > > > On 16 May 2010, at 18:26, Alexandre Bergel wrote: > >>> - Integegrate the remaining fixes and crates a PharoCore-11XXX-alpha1.zip and put it in gforge >> >> >> I will go over some this week. >> >> Alexandre >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
|
|
I am surprised too. would it not be safer to just apply the same
reversion of the code so that 1.1 is the same as 1.0? Then when someone has the time to do a full review, a "new" network can be applied to the start of a dev cycle, with some form of integration tests. cheers, Mike On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 6:31 AM, Adrian Lienhard <[hidden email]> wrote: > Hi Alex, > > One thing that bothers me is the network code. Although nobody reported problems I cannot believe that it suddenly works without that we fixed it. The new implementation that is in 1.1 has been reverted in 1.0 and since then we haven't had any complaints. Now in 1.1 I guess that there are not that many people using it yet. > > If there are people at the sprint with different OS and configurations (Linux vs Mac; IPv4 vs. IPv6), you could try to reproduce the problems that were reported earlier (check the issue tracker). > > Another valuable help would be to (manually) test the tools, especially the ones loaded into Pharo to make sure we don't have any obvious problems there. > > Hope you have a productive weekend! > > Cheers, > Adrian > > On May 18, 2010, at 02:49 , Alexandre Bergel wrote: > >> Mariano, Stef, Adrian, >> >> I would like to focus the Pharo sprint this week end on helping Pharo 1.1. >> In addition to reviewing and fixing the issues tagged as 1.1, are there some particular actions you want to see realized this Saturday? >> >> Cheers, >> Alexandre >> >> >> On 16 May 2010, at 18:26, Alexandre Bergel wrote: >> >>>> - Integegrate the remaining fixes and crates a PharoCore-11XXX-alpha1.zip and put it in gforge >>> >>> >>> I will go over some this week. >>> >>> Alexandre >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
|
|
In reply to this post by Alexandre Bergel-4
Alex
Can you tell me the french time of the sprint because I would like to help people focusing on some good fixes to produce I want to try to be online. Stef On May 18, 2010, at 2:49 AM, Alexandre Bergel wrote: > Mariano, Stef, Adrian, > > I would like to focus the Pharo sprint this week end on helping Pharo 1.1. > In addition to reviewing and fixing the issues tagged as 1.1, are there some particular actions you want to see realized this Saturday? > > Cheers, > Alexandre > > > On 16 May 2010, at 18:26, Alexandre Bergel wrote: > >>> - Integegrate the remaining fixes and crates a PharoCore-11XXX-alpha1.zip and put it in gforge >> >> >> I will go over some this week. >> >> Alexandre >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: So...we freeze 1.1 ? (next steps?)
|
|
In reply to this post by Michael Roberts-2
Yes, we should probably do that. It requires some work because of changes in 1.1.
Adrian On May 18, 2010, at 09:24 , Michael Roberts wrote: > I am surprised too. would it not be safer to just apply the same > reversion of the code so that 1.1 is the same as 1.0? Then when > someone has the time to do a full review, a "new" network can be > applied to the start of a dev cycle, with some form of integration > tests. > > cheers, > Mike > > On Tue, May 18, 2010 at 6:31 AM, Adrian Lienhard <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Hi Alex, >> >> One thing that bothers me is the network code. Although nobody reported problems I cannot believe that it suddenly works without that we fixed it. The new implementation that is in 1.1 has been reverted in 1.0 and since then we haven't had any complaints. Now in 1.1 I guess that there are not that many people using it yet. >> >> If there are people at the sprint with different OS and configurations (Linux vs Mac; IPv4 vs. IPv6), you could try to reproduce the problems that were reported earlier (check the issue tracker). >> >> Another valuable help would be to (manually) test the tools, especially the ones loaded into Pharo to make sure we don't have any obvious problems there. >> >> Hope you have a productive weekend! >> >> Cheers, >> Adrian >> >> On May 18, 2010, at 02:49 , Alexandre Bergel wrote: >> >>> Mariano, Stef, Adrian, >>> >>> I would like to focus the Pharo sprint this week end on helping Pharo 1.1. >>> In addition to reviewing and fixing the issues tagged as 1.1, are there some particular actions you want to see realized this Saturday? >>> >>> Cheers, >>> Alexandre >>> >>> >>> On 16 May 2010, at 18:26, Alexandre Bergel wrote: >>> >>>>> - Integegrate the remaining fixes and crates a PharoCore-11XXX-alpha1.zip and put it in gforge >>>> >>>> >>>> I will go over some this week. >>>> >>>> Alexandre >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>> [hidden email] >>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
«
Return to Pharo Smalltalk Developers
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |