Towards Squeak 4.0 [help needed]

Folks -

This is part one of two messages about upcoming releases.

The Squeak 4.0 release is right around the corner. It is the MIT/Apache
re-licensed version of 3.10.2. We are currently in (hopefully final)
discussions with SFC and will soon be ready to finalize matters.

We've talked about the 4.0 release it in the board and effectively we
need a release manager and/or release team which can take care of the
following actions:
- Add a new welcome screen that explains the new status
- Condense sources so that only relicensed content is included
- Repackage the image for the various platforms
This is straightforward, simple work that can basically be done right
away. In fact, it might be good to roll a 4.0beta straight from 3.10.2
and have that available for final discussions with SFC.

Since the work isn't all that much (it can probably be done in a few
hours on a lazy Sunday morning), this is a *great* way for anyone in the
community, even with relatively little experience in Squeak hacking, to
help the community along.

Please volunteer for either 4.0 release manager or 4.0 release team
member role. The board would like to find a community member to take the
lead since the board will be busy anyway (running for the board takes
its toll, the SFC discussions take time, and then some of us also would
like to get some hacking done :-) So don't be shy.

Cheers,
   - Andreas

I'm in for team-member. Let's do this!

On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 12:30 AM, Andreas Raab <[hidden email]> wrote:


--
Ron

On Friday 19 February 2010 02:00:46 pm Andreas Raab wrote:
>  In fact, it might be good to roll a 4.0beta straight from 3.10.2
> and have that available for final discussions with SFC.
+1.

We could announce a 4.0beta or even a 4.0rc for now and then go for 4.1 when
SFC comes through. The vm and image has significant changes from the 3.x
branch. In all fairness, we should bump major version to 4.x. The beta or rc
tag should be sufficient warning not to use it in production.

I would be happy to be part of the release team. Please count me in.

Onward ho! .. Subbu

Ronald Spengler wrote:
> I'm in for team-member. Let's do this!

Wonderful! How would you feel about leading the effort? (it is really
not all that much work :-) Me and probably anyone else will be happy to
help in any way we can but it'd be good if the board had someone who
feels responsible for getting it done.

Cheers,
   - Andreas

I need a list of requirements if I'm going to lead anything (I don't
know exactly what must be done.) I'd consider it, but I need to make
sure I can get it done before I say yes to that.

On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 10:12 PM, Andreas Raab <[hidden email]> wrote:


--
Ron

Ronald Spengler wrote:
> I need a list of requirements if I'm going to lead anything (I don't
> know exactly what must be done.) I'd consider it, but I need to make
> sure I can get it done before I say yes to that.

Just like I said earlier, the list of requirements is very short. We need:
- A version that has the identical code to 3.10.2 and ONLY the code from
3.10.2 since this is what we have discussed with SFC (requires
condensing sources)
- The image must have proper licensing information and let people know
about what happened (i.e., that it's a relicensed version of 3.10.2)
- The image should be packaged properly for the various platforms

That's about all that comes to mind in terms of requirements. Randal -
are there any other requirements you can think of?

Cheers,
   - Andreas

2010/2/22 Andreas Raab <[hidden email]>:
> Ronald Spengler wrote:
>>
>> I need a list of requirements if I'm going to lead anything (I don't


Sorry Andreas, if I'm not wrong you offered the Release Team position
to Edgar and
he answered yes. And now the offer is also to Roland.

I'm missing something?

Germán.

On 22 February 2010 13:42, Germán Arduino <[hidden email]> wrote:
Honestly, i'd like to see someone with better English communication
abilities than Edgar.
As to me, this is the main barrier between us - often i completely DNU
what Edgar says.
Or.. maybe its just me. If so, then forget what i'm saying.
I just thinking that understanding each other is the key to success.

@Edgar: Please don't take this as an offense, but i had to say it.
And, of course, i'm not questioning your programming skills and Squeak
experience.

> Germán.
>


--
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

But not understanding may be solved asking again.

Indeed a Release Team is a position that need strong communication
skills, and the guy that
will be there will need to invest some time on questions as write
mails, generate consensus and
coordinate things.

Anyway my question was directed to the fact that, if I'm not wrong,
the Release Team position was
offered to 2 different persons.

Germán.


2010/2/22 Igor Stasenko <[hidden email]>:

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010, Germán Arduino wrote:
There are two different releases and two different release teams.
See
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2010-February/144715.html 
and
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2010-February/144716.html
.


Levente

2010/2/22 Levente Uzonyi <[hidden email]>:
Ahh, ok, that means that:

Release Team Leader to the current trunk --> Edgar (until now)
Release Team Leader to the next 4.0 relicensed --> Roland (until now)

Is at this way?

Thanks by the clarification.

Germán.

On Mon, 22 Feb 2010, Germán Arduino wrote:
Yes.


Levente

>
> Thanks by the clarification.
>
> Germán.
>
>

This sounds like something I can handle.

Two more questions:

Obviously ASAP, but what's my deadline?

Who's my point of contact / source for legalese? Or shall I simply
compose a blurb and paste the MIT license at the top, then post that
to the list for peer review?

On Monday, February 22, 2010, Andreas Raab <[hidden email]> wrote:

--
Ron

Ronald Spengler wrote:
> This sounds like something I can handle.

Great, thanks!

> Two more questions:
>
> Obviously ASAP, but what's my deadline?

Ultimately when the SFC comes through; this could be fairly soon. It'd
be good if we had a draft 4.0 beta within a week; two weeks most (I had
hoped that someone would take a shot at it last weekend :-)

> Who's my point of contact / source for legalese? Or shall I simply
> compose a blurb and paste the MIT license at the top, then post that
> to the list for peer review?

The board is your contact/source. Randal specifically, but at this point
we all have pretty good visibility of the process. For the license I
think we should do something along the lines of listing both licenses,
MIT first, then Apache 2.0 in the sources file like here:

---------------------------------------------------------------------

'Squeak License Information:

The MIT License

Copyright (c) 1996-2010 The Squeak Community, All Rights Reserved.

Permission is hereby granted, free of charge, to any person obtaining a
copy of this software and associated documentation files (the
"Software"), to deal in the Software without restriction, including
without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish,
distribute, sublicense, and/or sell copies of the Software, and to
permit persons to whom the Software is furnished to do so, subject to
the following conditions:

The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included
in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.

THE SOFTWARE IS PROVIDED "AS IS", WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS
OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO THE WARRANTIES OF
MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE AND NONINFRINGEMENT.
IN NO EVENT SHALL THE AUTHORS OR COPYRIGHT HOLDERS BE LIABLE FOR ANY
CLAIM, DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY, WHETHER IN AN ACTION OF CONTRACT,
TORT OR OTHERWISE, ARISING FROM, OUT OF OR IN CONNECTION WITH THE
SOFTWARE OR THE USE OR OTHER DEALINGS IN
THE SOFTWARE.

Portions of Squeak are covered by the following license

Copyright (c) 1996 Apple Computer, Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); you may
not use this file except in compliance with the License. You may obtain
a copy of the License at

    http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0

Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software
distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS,
WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied.
See the License for the specific language governing permissions and
limitations under the License.'

---------------------------------------------------------------------
(note the single quotes around it which allow us to quote the licenses
verbatim at the beginning of the sources file)

I think the license header is pretty safe because it's literally the MIT
license (http://www.opensource.org/licenses/mit-license.php) and it's
literally the license header required in the Apple agreement
(http://ftp.squeak.org/docs/AppleApacheRelicense.pdf) The only thing I
have changed is the year and copyright notice for MIT. (arguably one
could say there's no such thing as The Squeak Community (tm) but the
fact is that everyone's signed the relicensing so I think we got our
asses covered)

In any case, it would be good if this were a repeatable process just in
case the SFC has specific wishes regarding the license header.

Cheers,
   - Andreas

Igor Stasenko wrote:
I disagree for several reasons. First, Edgar has already managed to lead
a release to successful completion which is no small feat. Second,
there's the small matter of who instead would sign up to be the lead for
the release. If there are alternative offers the board has a choice but
so far the only person I've seen actively volunteering (several times)
was Edgar. To be honest, I had feared noone would raise their hand
because it's real work and real time to be invested. But let me repeat
this: If there's anyone else who wants to lead the trunk release, RAISE
YOUR HAND.

If that means having to read less than perfect English, I can cope with
that. Edgar is a good-natured person and if you retain your humor his
notes can be quite funny :-)

Edgar needs our help, of course, and perhaps a bit more in the language
area than others. I'm more than willing to help him in this area because
he's got some real work ahead of him and needs support from everyone, in
every possible area you can think of.

Cheers,
   - Andreas

On Mon, 2010-02-22 at 19:00 -0800, Andreas Raab wrote:
I would like to participate on the release team. Clearly you need people
with more technical experience than I have, but I am pretty good at
writing and would be willing to help at least with that. I can offer
Win7, FreeBSD 8.0, Ubuntu 9.10, and OS X PowerPC and Intel to test
releases on.

--
Gary Dunn, Honolulu
[hidden email]
http://openslate.net/
http://e9erust.blogspot.com/
Sent from Slate001

On 2/23/10 7:52 AM, "Gary Dunn" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I would like to participate on the release team. Clearly you need people
> with more technical experience than I have, but I am pretty good at
> writing and would be willing to help at least with that. I can offer
> Win7, FreeBSD 8.0, Ubuntu 9.10, and OS X PowerPC and Intel to test
> releases on.
>
> --
> Gary Dunn, Honolulu

Welcome.
I think we email before.
You have several OS, like me, besides just now only use OS X PowerPC and
Intel.


Running the complete test suites each time a new image is published helps to
see how good the quality is.
With a fresh Squeak3.11-9371-alpha.image, run and update
http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6148 when you have time.

The last I run was
For fresh 'Squeak3.11-8472-alpha.image'
Tested on Mac Intel, Squeak 4.2.1beta1U VM
'2478 run, 2455 passes, 0 expected failures, 16 failures, 7 errors, 0
unexpected passes'

Edgar