So where is the "release" version of 3.7?

I can't say it makes me feel all fuzzy about 2.7 when it is still  
marked alpha and people seem to have dropped it in favor of beginning  
2.8.  The latest thing I can see in the repository is Seaside 2.7a1-
mb.205

It would be nice to see something labeled 2.7 final.

-Todd Blanchard


_______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

2007/2/26, Todd Blanchard <[hidden email]>:
> I can't say it makes me feel all fuzzy about 2.7 when it is still
> marked alpha and people seem to have dropped it in favor of beginning
> 2.8.  The latest thing I can see in the repository is Seaside 2.7a1-
> mb.205
>
> It would be nice to see something labeled 2.7 final.

I don't think this will happen because 2.7 will still evolve with bug
correction. What I can do is creating a branch named Seaside2.7 and
put the latest version here. Is that what you want ? Otherwise, I
think you might consider the last version the most stable.

--
Damien Cassou
_______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

> I can't say it makes me feel all fuzzy about 2.7 when it is still
> marked alpha and people seem to have dropped it in favor of beginning
> 2.8.  The latest thing I can see in the repository is Seaside 2.7a1-
> mb.205

Well, I don't think 2.7a1 means it is alpha. I don't know where this
scheme is coming from, maybe the $a means 'Avi' and I simply
misunderstood when I started the 2.7a1 branch. There was once a 2.6d
branch, where the $d could have ment 'Dolphin' Smalltalk. I think of
it as a progression from $a to $z, that's it.

2.7a1 will stop as soon as Michel published his port to VisualWorks,
further bug fixes will be committed in 2.7b1. In the meantime we
continue in 2.8a1 with some radical changed ;-)

> It would be nice to see something labeled 2.7 final.

The version labeled as final is the one in the SqueakMap package
'SeasideInstaller'. SqueakSource is just a working repository where
everybody committs whatever he/she contributes.

Cheers,
Lukas

--
Lukas Renggli
http://www.lukas-renggli.ch
_______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

Todd Blanchard wrote:
> I can't say it makes me feel all fuzzy about 2.7 when it is still marked
> alpha and people seem to have dropped it in favor of beginning 2.8.  The
> latest thing I can see in the repository is Seaside 2.7a1-mb.205
>
> It would be nice to see something labeled 2.7 final.

Todd --

Don't let the alpha label bother you.. I was bothered by that as well
when I first was using Seaside about a year ago -- While I've found a
few missing pieces (seasideasync livecallbacks most recently) here or
there, I don't believe I've found any bugs yet --or none that come to
mind.. Don't assume that Seaside Alpha = Microsoft Alpha..  (sorry
couldn't help myself!)

-- Rick
_______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

Todd Blanchard wrote:
> I can't say it makes me feel all fuzzy about 2.7 when it is still marked
> alpha and people seem to have dropped it in favor of beginning 2.8.  The
> latest thing I can see in the repository is Seaside 2.7a1-mb.205
>
> It would be nice to see something labeled 2.7 final.

I couldn't agree more.
For the same reason(s) I dropped SmallWiki, never started using Pier and
am somewhat confused in which version of Seaside I should invest
building major applications. I'm not against evolving systems, but if
things get dropped before they even get finished, then I'm out.

Michael
_______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

Definitely don't want to see the same run-and-gun that's happening in
Squeak overall :) Progress is good, but being a little more organized
and explicit about what each version means would be great.

-Boris

--
+1.604.689.0322
DeepCove Labs Ltd.
4th floor 595 Howe Street
Vancouver, Canada V6C 2T5
http://tinyurl.com/r7uw4

[hidden email]

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE

This email is intended only for the persons named in the message
header. Unless otherwise indicated, it contains information that is
private and confidential. If you have received it in error, please
notify the sender and delete the entire message including any
attachments.

Thank you.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:seaside-
> [hidden email]] On Behalf Of Michael Rueger
> Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 10:01 AM
> To: The Squeak Enterprise Aubergines Server - general discussion.
> Subject: Re: [Seaside] So where is the "release" version of 3.7?
>
> Todd Blanchard wrote:
> > I can't say it makes me feel all fuzzy about 2.7 when it is still
marked
> > alpha and people seem to have dropped it in favor of beginning 2.8.
The
> > latest thing I can see in the repository is Seaside 2.7a1-mb.205
> >
> > It would be nice to see something labeled 2.7 final.
>
> I couldn't agree more.
> For the same reason(s) I dropped SmallWiki, never started using Pier
and
> am somewhat confused in which version of Seaside I should invest
> building major applications. I'm not against evolving systems, but if
> things get dropped before they even get finished, then I'm out.
>
> Michael
> _______________________________________________
> Seaside mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
_______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

2007/2/26, Rick Flower <[hidden email]>:
> Don't assume that Seaside Alpha = Microsoft Alpha..  (sorry couldn't help myself!)

Not even Microsoft final :-)  (I know you all thought of it, I'm just
the one who said it :-))

--
Damien Cassou
_______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

2007/2/26, Boris Popov <[hidden email]>:
> Definitely don't want to see the same run-and-gun that's happening in
> Squeak overall :) Progress is good, but being a little more organized
> and explicit about what each version means would be great.

What would you suggest that keeps Lukas, Philippe and Michel
productive and inventive?

--
Damien Cassou
_______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

Come up and announce a versioning schema that includes major version
(2.6, 2.7, 2.8), minor version (1, 2, 3) and phase (alpha, beta, final)
information so that one could easily load most recent, compatible
version to what they have already, so if I have an app that uses 2.6.10,
I could easily tell that upgrading to 2.6.354 is probably safe, whereas
upgrading to 2.7 and 2.8 would probably involve changes to my code.
Also, when starting from scratch, I could tell which version is alpha,
beta or final and make a decision accordingly.

I certainly don't mean to hinder the progress, just wish it was easier
to tell by version numbers what impact that progress has on the version
stream.

And we should definitely thank these guys for their hard work in the
first place, there's some cool stuff coming out of the pipeline.

Cheers!

-Boris

--
+1.604.689.0322
DeepCove Labs Ltd.
4th floor 595 Howe Street
Vancouver, Canada V6C 2T5
http://tinyurl.com/r7uw4

[hidden email]

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE

This email is intended only for the persons named in the message
header. Unless otherwise indicated, it contains information that is
private and confidential. If you have received it in error, please
notify the sender and delete the entire message including any
attachments.

Thank you.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:seaside-
> [hidden email]] On Behalf Of Damien Cassou
> Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 10:08 AM
> To: The Squeak Enterprise Aubergines Server - general discussion.
> Subject: Re: [Seaside] So where is the "release" version of 3.7?
>
> 2007/2/26, Boris Popov <[hidden email]>:
> > Definitely don't want to see the same run-and-gun that's happening
in
> > Squeak overall :) Progress is good, but being a little more
organized _______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

 
> 2.7a1 will stop as soon as Michel published his port to
> VisualWorks, further bug fixes will be committed in 2.7b1. In
> the meantime we continue in 2.8a1 with some radical changed ;-)

At the moment, only 2.6 has been published for VisualWorks.
In the public repository, the latest version is 2.6b1.133.0
and corresponds to Squeak 2.6b1-mb.133

This very same version of 2.6 will be also made available on the
soon-to-be-released VW 7.5 distribution, so that you will not
need to be online to get a decently stable and recent version of
Seaside.

The coming VW 7.5 distribution will also include a preview of
Seaside 2.7 (based on 2.7a1-mb.205). No guarantee that this
preview works with the various addons (SeasideAsync, Scriptaculous,
SeasideTestingForVisualWorks, SeasideShortPath, SeasideSettings,
and so forth). The addons are for 2.6.

After VW 7.5 is released, I will start publishing 2.7 for VisualWorks
in the public repository and I will stop maintaining 2.6, except
for bug fixes. I am thinking of changing the numbering so that the
the first 2.7 published version for VisualWorks will be 2.7b1.1.0.
I will also change the numbering on the Squeak side accordingly.
When 2.7 is getting stable for VisualWorks, I will have to tackle
the addons, that should not be too difficult. Here too I will have
to do some renumberings and provide explicit comments to that
addons for 2.6 are not loaded in 2.7.

Let me know if you, the VW Seasiders, need more information.

Cheers,
Michel.



 
_______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

> For the same reason(s) I dropped SmallWiki, never started using Pier and
> am somewhat confused in which version of Seaside I should invest
> building major applications. I'm not against evolving systems, but if
> things get dropped before they even get finished, then I'm out.

There is absolutely nothing that gets dropped. I use the versions I
publish in everyday development of commercial Seaside applications. I
don't earn my living by labeling versions of Seaside, SmallWiki and
Pier, but by building things on top of that. I contribute to Seaside
and other projects because it is interesting to me, it allows me be
even more efficient with my commercial developments and because I want
to share the code with you (I also use other peoples code that
contributed to other parts of Squeak). If you don't like the way we
label the versions, you don't have to use it. I also don't use every
framework I encounter, sometimes the code doesn't look to appealing,
there are too few tests, ... that's just it.

Cheers,
Lukas

--
Lukas Renggli
http://www.lukas-renggli.ch
_______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

I would really to see an official announcement for 2.7 (when it will  
be finished) so that we can market it well.

Stef

On 26 févr. 07, at 18:46, Todd Blanchard wrote:

_______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

Progress is all well and good, but in a cycle you typically have open  
development - stuff is broken all over the place, not everything  
planned is done.  This is usually 'alpha'.

At some point you reach "feature complete"  but with known problems.  
This is usually 'beta'.  From here you commit to no more new  
features, no structural changes, only bug fixes.  Features and  
architecture are frozen.

When the defect discovery rate gets low enough, you call it a  
release.  You may have subsequent minor releases to fix minor  
problems - but this version is considered "stable".  I can count on  
it being of reasonably high quality and that pulling an update of  
this line will not require any code changes on my part.

Then you start over.

I know that the feature freeze/bug fix only releases aren't really  
fun and you have to restrain your muse.  But for the people trying to  
build on top of this stuff - your fun comes at their expense.  They  
don't have time to change a bunch of code just because in some  
iteration the framework developers decided to toss some mechanism  
because it isn't elegant.

Draw a line in the sand - call it the stable release, we can have an  
announcement, serve cake, get on slashdot.  Bump the version number.

If people can't see what horse to bet on, they will not bet.

-Todd Blanchard


On Feb 26, 2007, at 10:07 AM, Damien Cassou wrote:

_______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

2007/2/26, Todd Blanchard <[hidden email]>:
That's not how Seaside is developed. We don't have such cycles. As
Lukas said, in general we use the latest Seaside version for
production applications and we certainly develop Pier and Magritte
against the latest version. You can't do that if you have open bugs
that you know about. Sure there are instable phases when a lot of
refactoring is going on (like start of 2.7 or lr.171+) but that's in
general only maybe 4 versions. If we know about a bug, we fix it, if
we want a feature, we implement it. This is how Seaside is developed.
This is why it is pointless to attach a label to a Seaside version.

Philippe
_______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

On 2/26/07, Philippe Marschall <[hidden email]> wrote:

> That's not how Seaside is developed. We don't have such cycles. As
> Lukas said, in general we use the latest Seaside version for
> production applications and we certainly develop Pier and Magritte
> against the latest version. You can't do that if you have open bugs
> that you know about. Sure there are instable phases when a lot of
> refactoring is going on (like start of 2.7 or lr.171+) but that's in
> general only maybe 4 versions. If we know about a bug, we fix it, if
> we want a feature, we implement it. This is how Seaside is developed.
> This is why it is pointless to attach a label to a Seaside version.

Ok, but there are processes that work for that too.  Have a branch
that is 2.7-stable, and generally commit to that.  If you're doing a
refactoring or feature you're not sure about, do it on
2.7-somerefactoring, then merge in when you're confident of it.  The
important thing is just that everyone know what the system is.

Avi
_______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

Ditto; as an outside developer it's important for me to be able to tell
which versions are considered stable and which versions are in flux
while major refactoring is underway and there isn't a way to tell that
at the moment, is there? There's nothing wrong with the process that you
have, it's just that we'd like to know a little more about where things
are at any given time and I thought including that bit of extra context
in the version number may be the least impact solution for everyone, but
ultimately it's up to you anyhow.

-Boris

--
+1.604.689.0322
DeepCove Labs Ltd.
4th floor 595 Howe Street
Vancouver, Canada V6C 2T5
http://tinyurl.com/r7uw4

[hidden email]

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE

This email is intended only for the persons named in the message
header. Unless otherwise indicated, it contains information that is
private and confidential. If you have received it in error, please
notify the sender and delete the entire message including any
attachments.

Thank you. developed. _______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

On 2/26/07, Avi Bryant <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Ok, but there are processes that work for that too.  Have a branch
> that is 2.7-stable, and generally commit to that.  If you're doing a
> refactoring or feature you're not sure about, do it on
> 2.7-somerefactoring, then merge in when you're confident of it.  The
> important thing is just that everyone know what the system is.

Let me hasten to add that I am more responsible than anyone for the
ad-hoc release culture here.  Now that I'm in a less active role, it's
easy to preach from the sidelines :).  But we've grown a lot (this
list is nearly 600 strong, now), so we can probably afford to clean up
our act a little.

Avi
_______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

2007/2/26, Avi Bryant <[hidden email]>:
It's just that Monticello doesn't support this. The Monticello
filename hacks have to stop.  For example the filename hacks of
Chronos wreck havoc on the Monticello Browser. An other example my
Monticello marks Seaside2.8a1 as if there was a new version that I
haven't loaded which isn't the case. Additionally they make the
Seaside repository even more crowded.

We need metadata for this and it needs to be simple to use otherwise
everyone marks their versions as unstable and nothing is gained. Or a
section on the yet to be built Seaside webpage so that people don't
have to access the (very confusing) repository anymore.

So my point on this is if you want something to happen in this area is
be part of the solution and don't just write mails.

Philippe

> Avi
> _______________________________________________
> Seaside mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
>
_______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

On 2/26/07, Philippe Marschall <[hidden email]> wrote:

> It's just that Monticello doesn't support this. The Monticello
> filename hacks have to stop.  For example the filename hacks of
> Chronos wreck havoc on the Monticello Browser. An other example my
> Monticello marks Seaside2.8a1 as if there was a new version that I
> haven't loaded which isn't the case. Additionally they make the
> Seaside repository even more crowded.

So I agree with you that the filename hacks are silly.  That said,
Package.branch-author.99 works pretty well as a format.  For somewhat
annoying historical reasons, "Seaside2" is our package name.  Why
don't we acknowledge that we don't really "do" releases, and just have
a Seaside2.stable branch, and then various meaningfully named
Seaside2.foo branches.  For example, a lot of the 2.7 work could have
been classified as Seaside2.canvas-only or some such.  That's what we
do for Dabble, and it's worked well (we're probably past 10k commits
at this point).  The MC browser splits the repository up on branch
name (it considers them all separate packages), which keeps clutter
under control.

Either that, or have a separate "stable" repository and copy stuff
into that when it's ready, but that seems like more work to me.

Avi
_______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside

Ouch, I thought this was a constructive conversation to discuss the
options, no one has to do anything and we can leave the things the way
they are. The point brought up earlier had to do with trying to make it
easier for an ever increasing community to understand various versions
being published on a regular basis (good thing!) and there isn't much I
can personally do to help you figure it out outside of writing mails for
many reasons, including the fact that I don't directly commit any
changes to the stream, I have no Squeak experience or free time (as much
as I'd have liked to do all of the above). Feel free to ignore the
suggestions, that's all they are after all, but unless I'm misreading
you it seems they are not welcomed at the moment.

Cheers!

-Boris

--
+1.604.689.0322
DeepCove Labs Ltd.
4th floor 595 Howe Street
Vancouver, Canada V6C 2T5
http://tinyurl.com/r7uw4

[hidden email]

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE

This email is intended only for the persons named in the message
header. Unless otherwise indicated, it contains information that is
private and confidential. If you have received it in error, please
notify the sender and delete the entire message including any
attachments.

Thank you.
bugs
> > > that you know about. Sure there are instable phases when a lot of
> > > refactoring is going on (like start of 2.7 or lr.171+) but that's
in
> > > general only maybe 4 versions. If we know about a bug, we fix it,
if
> > > we want a feature, we implement it. This is how Seaside is
developed.
> > > This is why it is pointless to attach a label to a Seaside
version. _______________________________________________
Seaside mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside