Which one should I download?

Previous Topic Next Topic
 
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
36 messages Options
12
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Which one should I download?

fstephany
I'd like to download the latest Pharo 3 on the CI server but I don't know which one I should download?

The last one on the list?

Screen Shot 2014-02-25 at 21.03.07.png (130K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which one should I download?

EstebanLM
none

just download this one:

http://files.pharo.org/image/30/latest.zip

is always the latest effective build.

Esteban

On 25 Feb 2014, at 21:05, François Stephany <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'd like to download the latest Pharo 3 on the CI server but I don't know which one I should download?
>
> The last one on the list?
> <Screen Shot 2014-02-25 at 21.03.07.png>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which one should I download?

LogiqueWerks
I am running from that latest.zip tonight and PackageTreeNautilusUI >>update is getting a walkback messageNoUnderstood for
receiver of >>protocolsFor: is nil

I simply flipped to class view in Announcements and then flipped that toggle back.

Does this need to be reported, or is Nautilus still known to be unstable ?

thanks

I'll go back to my older 3.0 candidate for now ...

R


On 25 February 2014 19:02, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote:
none

just download this one:

http://files.pharo.org/image/30/latest.zip

is always the latest effective build.

Esteban

On 25 Feb 2014, at 21:05, François Stephany <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'd like to download the latest Pharo 3 on the CI server but I don't know which one I should download?
>
> The last one on the list?
> <Screen Shot 2014-02-25 at 21.03.07.png>



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which one should I download?

LogiqueWerks
In reply to this post by EstebanLM
that problematic latest.zip contains -30782 files

R


On 25 February 2014 19:02, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote:
none

just download this one:

http://files.pharo.org/image/30/latest.zip

is always the latest effective build.

Esteban

On 25 Feb 2014, at 21:05, François Stephany <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'd like to download the latest Pharo 3 on the CI server but I don't know which one I should download?
>
> The last one on the list?
> <Screen Shot 2014-02-25 at 21.03.07.png>



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which one should I download?

EstebanLM
In reply to this post by LogiqueWerks
Nautilus is not unstable. 
That should not be happening and in fact I cannot reproduce it. 
Please report. 

On 26 Feb 2014, at 01:57, Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]> wrote:

I am running from that latest.zip tonight and PackageTreeNautilusUI >>update is getting a walkback messageNoUnderstood for
receiver of >>protocolsFor: is nil

I simply flipped to class view in Announcements and then flipped that toggle back.

Does this need to be reported, or is Nautilus still known to be unstable ?

thanks

I'll go back to my older 3.0 candidate for now ...

R


On 25 February 2014 19:02, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote:
none

just download this one:

http://files.pharo.org/image/30/latest.zip

is always the latest effective build.

Esteban

On 25 Feb 2014, at 21:05, François Stephany <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'd like to download the latest Pharo 3 on the CI server but I don't know which one I should download?
>
> The last one on the list?
> <Screen Shot 2014-02-25 at 21.03.07.png>




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which one should I download?

EstebanLM
and even if it would be unstable… issues needs to be always reported, is the only way to be aware :)

On 26 Feb 2014, at 07:45, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote:

Nautilus is not unstable. 
That should not be happening and in fact I cannot reproduce it. 
Please report. 

On 26 Feb 2014, at 01:57, Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]> wrote:

I am running from that latest.zip tonight and PackageTreeNautilusUI >>update is getting a walkback messageNoUnderstood for
receiver of >>protocolsFor: is nil

I simply flipped to class view in Announcements and then flipped that toggle back.

Does this need to be reported, or is Nautilus still known to be unstable ?

thanks

I'll go back to my older 3.0 candidate for now ...

R


On 25 February 2014 19:02, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote:
none

just download this one:

http://files.pharo.org/image/30/latest.zip

is always the latest effective build.

Esteban

On 25 Feb 2014, at 21:05, François Stephany <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'd like to download the latest Pharo 3 on the CI server but I don't know which one I should download?
>
> The last one on the list?
> <Screen Shot 2014-02-25 at 21.03.07.png>





Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which one should I download?

Sven Van Caekenberghe-2
In reply to this post by LogiqueWerks

On 26 Feb 2014, at 01:57, Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am running from that latest.zip tonight and PackageTreeNautilusUI >>update is getting a walkback messageNoUnderstood for
> receiver of >>protocolsFor: is nil
>
> I simply flipped to class view in Announcements and then flipped that toggle back.
>
> Does this need to be reported, or is Nautilus still known to be unstable ?

I can't reproduce this either, please be more specific.

BTW, Nautilus is stable and used daily by the whole community. Of course, it is a complex piece of code with lots of UI and system interactions, so issues are always possible.

Sven



Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which one should I download?

LogiqueWerks
this was a new image and all I was doing was bringing up the System Browser

I have run Pharo on this old XP SP 3.1 laptop on my writing desk for a few years now ... it was disappointing to encounter, as I am expecting Pharo3 next month and then in April, the next WIndows 8, so I sort of had in mind that this sort of thing was not there ... no method had been changed, nothing had been executed with CTRL-D in a workspace ... strictly the most basic sort of sanity check, and that only because I am not used to just copying down latest.zip

I will look to reproduce now.

R


On 26 February 2014 04:36, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 26 Feb 2014, at 01:57, Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am running from that latest.zip tonight and PackageTreeNautilusUI >>update is getting a walkback messageNoUnderstood for
> receiver of >>protocolsFor: is nil
>
> I simply flipped to class view in Announcements and then flipped that toggle back.
>
> Does this need to be reported, or is Nautilus still known to be unstable ?

I can't reproduce this either, please be more specific.

BTW, Nautilus is stable and used daily by the whole community. Of course, it is a complex piece of code with lots of UI and system interactions, so issues are always possible.

Sven




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which one should I download?

LogiqueWerks
In reply to this post by Sven Van Caekenberghe-2
hit another walkback first

screenshot attached

this must be Windows XP 3.1 issue ...


On 26 February 2014 04:36, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 26 Feb 2014, at 01:57, Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am running from that latest.zip tonight and PackageTreeNautilusUI >>update is getting a walkback messageNoUnderstood for
> receiver of >>protocolsFor: is nil
>
> I simply flipped to class view in Announcements and then flipped that toggle back.
>
> Does this need to be reported, or is Nautilus still known to be unstable ?

I can't reproduce this either, please be more specific.

BTW, Nautilus is stable and used daily by the whole community. Of course, it is a complex piece of code with lots of UI and system interactions, so issues are always possible.

Sven





pharo3_walkback2.png (192K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which one should I download?

LogiqueWerks
In reply to this post by Sven Van Caekenberghe-2
I did a fresh 3.0 install when I got the latest walkback ... I had not even dropped in the files from latest.zip yet.

I have insomnia, so please bear with me ... I should be asleep at this hour ...

debug log attached 

BTW  - Why are we not naming these log files for the image that was running when the log was written ?

r




On 26 February 2014 04:36, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 26 Feb 2014, at 01:57, Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am running from that latest.zip tonight and PackageTreeNautilusUI >>update is getting a walkback messageNoUnderstood for
> receiver of >>protocolsFor: is nil
>
> I simply flipped to class view in Announcements and then flipped that toggle back.
>
> Does this need to be reported, or is Nautilus still known to be unstable ?

I can't reproduce this either, please be more specific.

BTW, Nautilus is stable and used daily by the whole community. Of course, it is a complex piece of code with lots of UI and system interactions, so issues are always possible.

Sven





PharoDebug.log (65K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which one should I download?

LogiqueWerks
In reply to this post by EstebanLM
"And in fact" I hit another walkback before I could reproduce it in a fresh 3.0 beta install


On 26 February 2014 02:49, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote:
and even if it would be unstable… issues needs to be always reported, is the only way to be aware :)

On 26 Feb 2014, at 07:45, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote:

Nautilus is not unstable. 
That should not be happening and in fact I cannot reproduce it. 
Please report. 

On 26 Feb 2014, at 01:57, Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]> wrote:

I am running from that latest.zip tonight and PackageTreeNautilusUI >>update is getting a walkback messageNoUnderstood for
receiver of >>protocolsFor: is nil

I simply flipped to class view in Announcements and then flipped that toggle back.

Does this need to be reported, or is Nautilus still known to be unstable ?

thanks

I'll go back to my older 3.0 candidate for now ...

R


On 25 February 2014 19:02, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote:
none

just download this one:

http://files.pharo.org/image/30/latest.zip

is always the latest effective build.

Esteban

On 25 Feb 2014, at 21:05, François Stephany <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I'd like to download the latest Pharo 3 on the CI server but I don't know which one I should download?
>
> The last one on the list?
> <Screen Shot 2014-02-25 at 21.03.07.png>







PharoDebug.log (65K) Download Attachment
pharo3_walkback2.png (192K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which one should I download?

LogiqueWerks
In reply to this post by Sven Van Caekenberghe-2
and I will also now re-name this file output (see attached)


On 26 February 2014 04:36, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 26 Feb 2014, at 01:57, Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am running from that latest.zip tonight and PackageTreeNautilusUI >>update is getting a walkback messageNoUnderstood for
> receiver of >>protocolsFor: is nil
>
> I simply flipped to class view in Announcements and then flipped that toggle back.
>
> Does this need to be reported, or is Nautilus still known to be unstable ?

I can't reproduce this either, please be more specific.

BTW, Nautilus is stable and used daily by the whole community. Of course, it is a complex piece of code with lots of UI and system interactions, so issues are always possible.

Sven





stderr (4K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which one should I download?

Sven Van Caekenberghe-2
In reply to this post by LogiqueWerks

On 26 Feb 2014, at 10:54, Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]> wrote:

> this must be Windows XP 3.1 issue ...

I hope some other Windows users can reply, but it sure looks like a very fundamental local problem...
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which one should I download?

LogiqueWerks
In reply to this post by Sven Van Caekenberghe-2
and maybe not easy to reproduce in 30782


On 26 February 2014 04:36, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 26 Feb 2014, at 01:57, Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am running from that latest.zip tonight and PackageTreeNautilusUI >>update is getting a walkback messageNoUnderstood for
> receiver of >>protocolsFor: is nil
>
> I simply flipped to class view in Announcements and then flipped that toggle back.
>
> Does this need to be reported, or is Nautilus still known to be unstable ?

I can't reproduce this either, please be more specific.

BTW, Nautilus is stable and used daily by the whole community. Of course, it is a complex piece of code with lots of UI and system interactions, so issues are always possible.

Sven





pharo30782_walkback2.png (142K) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which one should I download?

LogiqueWerks
In reply to this post by Sven Van Caekenberghe-2
"BTW, Nautilus is stable and used daily by the whole community."

This still rankles ... I have been a Smalltalker since long before Squeak and have been using Pharo since Seaside first ran on it - if not earlier than that ...

I also received from another on the mail list

"and in fact I cannot reproduce it."

"And in fact" is such a wicked rhetorical move ... in a game I have lost all interest in playing now that I am retired.

It may take me a lot of effort to track these 2 bugs down as far as "Follow these steps to reproduce" .. but then I am not a CONSORTIUM member ( I used to pay big bucks for Smalltalk, back in the day ) so may be I am too far outside the "whole community".... btw.

I will spare you my plot's view of the term "stable" and the notion of stability ... and will be sure I rename key files as I go along ... [ why are we still having to rename files such as these when able to run multiple images in the same dir ? ]

ciao



On 26 February 2014 04:36, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 26 Feb 2014, at 01:57, Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am running from that latest.zip tonight and PackageTreeNautilusUI >>update is getting a walkback messageNoUnderstood for
> receiver of >>protocolsFor: is nil
>
> I simply flipped to class view in Announcements and then flipped that toggle back.
>
> Does this need to be reported, or is Nautilus still known to be unstable ?

I can't reproduce this either, please be more specific.

BTW, Nautilus is stable and used daily by the whole community. Of course, it is a complex piece of code with lots of UI and system interactions, so issues are always possible.

Sven




Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which one should I download?

EstebanLM

On 26 Feb 2014, at 11:30, Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]> wrote:

"BTW, Nautilus is stable and used daily by the whole community."

This still rankles ... I have been a Smalltalker since long before Squeak and have been using Pharo since Seaside first ran on it - if not earlier than that ...

I also received from another on the mail list

"and in fact I cannot reproduce it."

"And in fact" is such a wicked rhetorical move ... in a game I have lost all interest in playing now that I am retired.

it is not. 
it was just saying that I tried your problem and I could not reproduce it. It was not to been rethorical or anything, just pointing a fact. 
I’m interested (and is also my job) on having the best and stable version of Pharo possible. 
I’m so interested that I was at 10min from leaving a my house to take an 10h fly and I sit to try to reproduce your problem. 
So, please… do not misinterpret the contents of the mail. It was an attempt to have an understanding of the problem, in an effort to help.
An effort, btw, that sometimes is not easy, because we do not have all the elements to make the diagnostic… 


It may take me a lot of effort to track these 2 bugs down as far as "Follow these steps to reproduce" .. but then I am not a CONSORTIUM member ( I used to pay big bucks for Smalltalk, back in the day ) so may be I am too far outside the "whole community".... btw.

The community is here. In this list. Around the list. 
Consortium is for companies willing to contribute with some money support (and so is the association for individuals), because things cost effort and effort implies time and time implies money. 
We always try to solve the problems of everybody (we, the community, including yourself), because that’s the best for all… so do not put yourself outside in a way we never say/act/even think about. 
We want to help you. 


I will spare you my plot's view of the term "stable" and the notion of stability ... and will be sure I rename key files as I go along ... [ why are we still having to rename files such as these when able to run multiple images in the same dir ? ]

Your pov about stability can be ok. What is not ok is such amount of negativity over a simple fact: we has not been able to reproduce your problem (but you avoid the other obvious fact: we tried to reproduce it. So we did not ignored you).

Again, I try to help, as everybody in the community… but such a negative over-reaction is probably just compared to my own overeacted answer :)

Esteban 
  


ciao



On 26 February 2014 04:36, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 26 Feb 2014, at 01:57, Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am running from that latest.zip tonight and PackageTreeNautilusUI >>update is getting a walkback messageNoUnderstood for
> receiver of >>protocolsFor: is nil
>
> I simply flipped to class view in Announcements and then flipped that toggle back.
>
> Does this need to be reported, or is Nautilus still known to be unstable ?

I can't reproduce this either, please be more specific.

BTW, Nautilus is stable and used daily by the whole community. Of course, it is a complex piece of code with lots of UI and system interactions, so issues are always possible.

Sven





Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which one should I download?

Nicolai Hess
In reply to this post by LogiqueWerks
I tried a fresh Pharo-30782.image but I can not reproduce this errors.
I am on a Windows 7 machine.

When I am at home I can try to run this image on an older Windows XP machine.






2014-02-26 11:07 GMT+01:00 Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]>:
I did a fresh 3.0 install when I got the latest walkback ... I had not even dropped in the files from latest.zip yet.

I have insomnia, so please bear with me ... I should be asleep at this hour ...

debug log attached 

BTW  - Why are we not naming these log files for the image that was running when the log was written ?

r




On 26 February 2014 04:36, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 26 Feb 2014, at 01:57, Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am running from that latest.zip tonight and PackageTreeNautilusUI >>update is getting a walkback messageNoUnderstood for
> receiver of >>protocolsFor: is nil
>
> I simply flipped to class view in Announcements and then flipped that toggle back.
>
> Does this need to be reported, or is Nautilus still known to be unstable ?

I can't reproduce this either, please be more specific.

BTW, Nautilus is stable and used daily by the whole community. Of course, it is a complex piece of code with lots of UI and system interactions, so issues are always possible.

Sven





Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which one should I download?

LogiqueWerks
In reply to this post by EstebanLM
regardless ...

I did a sanity check on the contents of yesterday's latest.zip and hit a walkback

I then did a sanity check on the latest 3.0 installer and hit a different walkback.

At least on Win XP 3.1 that does not feel like Beta but like alpha, in my experience.  Unstable.

Sanity check for a Smalltalk image

  open a browser 
  open a workspace
  flip about in the browser  [across packages, classes, instance view, class view, implementors and callers
  DoIt from workspace [never got here either time ; I would do smthg like a ProfStef or call up a browser ; no set routine as that way lies madness ]

AND while doing the above, flip between windows, max /min [ I have been doing this for years ... it takes only a couple of minutes - it is not a step-wise protocol .... that would result in missing things that you wouldn't expect - and it is in NO way exhaustive ... it is just a sanity check ( Do you know what year it is? Who is the President of USA ?  What is today's date ? How did you get here ? Do you know why you were [arrested/admitted/removed from the aircraft/booted outa the bar ... ) ]

Hunch ONLY :

Likely culprit ... each time I also opened for future use (and to have some frames open
   Metacello browser
   the 2 help items off the main popup menu (one general; one Tutorials - a new user is likely to do so )

I suspect one of the latter, based on Last Class Changed for that image ... but that will be my hunch for now ...

ciao

r
  
   


On 26 February 2014 07:18, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 26 Feb 2014, at 11:30, Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]> wrote:

"BTW, Nautilus is stable and used daily by the whole community."

This still rankles ... I have been a Smalltalker since long before Squeak and have been using Pharo since Seaside first ran on it - if not earlier than that ...

I also received from another on the mail list

"and in fact I cannot reproduce it."

"And in fact" is such a wicked rhetorical move ... in a game I have lost all interest in playing now that I am retired.

it is not. 
it was just saying that I tried your problem and I could not reproduce it. It was not to been rethorical or anything, just pointing a fact. 
I’m interested (and is also my job) on having the best and stable version of Pharo possible. 
I’m so interested that I was at 10min from leaving a my house to take an 10h fly and I sit to try to reproduce your problem. 
So, please… do not misinterpret the contents of the mail. It was an attempt to have an understanding of the problem, in an effort to help.
An effort, btw, that sometimes is not easy, because we do not have all the elements to make the diagnostic… 


It may take me a lot of effort to track these 2 bugs down as far as "Follow these steps to reproduce" .. but then I am not a CONSORTIUM member ( I used to pay big bucks for Smalltalk, back in the day ) so may be I am too far outside the "whole community".... btw.

The community is here. In this list. Around the list. 
Consortium is for companies willing to contribute with some money support (and so is the association for individuals), because things cost effort and effort implies time and time implies money. 
We always try to solve the problems of everybody (we, the community, including yourself), because that’s the best for all… so do not put yourself outside in a way we never say/act/even think about. 
We want to help you. 


I will spare you my plot's view of the term "stable" and the notion of stability ... and will be sure I rename key files as I go along ... [ why are we still having to rename files such as these when able to run multiple images in the same dir ? ]

Your pov about stability can be ok. What is not ok is such amount of negativity over a simple fact: we has not been able to reproduce your problem (but you avoid the other obvious fact: we tried to reproduce it. So we did not ignored you).

Again, I try to help, as everybody in the community… but such a negative over-reaction is probably just compared to my own overeacted answer :)

Esteban 
  


ciao



On 26 February 2014 04:36, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 26 Feb 2014, at 01:57, Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am running from that latest.zip tonight and PackageTreeNautilusUI >>update is getting a walkback messageNoUnderstood for
> receiver of >>protocolsFor: is nil
>
> I simply flipped to class view in Announcements and then flipped that toggle back.
>
> Does this need to be reported, or is Nautilus still known to be unstable ?

I can't reproduce this either, please be more specific.

BTW, Nautilus is stable and used daily by the whole community. Of course, it is a complex piece of code with lots of UI and system interactions, so issues are always possible.

Sven






Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which one should I download?

pharo4Stef@free.fr
robert

Are you sure that you really use the latest version?
Because I do not see why opening a window would be platform specific and I could not reproduce this problem. 
So do you have a real way to reproduce the problem? can you send us the debuglog?
And BTW Pharo is our and your system and we work all to make it better so no need to be pushy it does not help.

Stef


On 26 Feb 2014, at 12:38, Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]> wrote:

regardless ...

I did a sanity check on the contents of yesterday's latest.zip and hit a walkback

I then did a sanity check on the latest 3.0 installer and hit a different walkback.

At least on Win XP 3.1 that does not feel like Beta but like alpha, in my experience.  Unstable.

Sanity check for a Smalltalk image

  open a browser 
  open a workspace
  flip about in the browser  [across packages, classes, instance view, class view, implementors and callers
  DoIt from workspace [never got here either time ; I would do smthg like a ProfStef or call up a browser ; no set routine as that way lies madness ]

AND while doing the above, flip between windows, max /min [ I have been doing this for years ... it takes only a couple of minutes - it is not a step-wise protocol .... that would result in missing things that you wouldn't expect - and it is in NO way exhaustive ... it is just a sanity check ( Do you know what year it is? Who is the President of USA ?  What is today's date ? How did you get here ? Do you know why you were [arrested/admitted/removed from the aircraft/booted outa the bar ... ) ]

Hunch ONLY :

Likely culprit ... each time I also opened for future use (and to have some frames open
   Metacello browser
   the 2 help items off the main popup menu (one general; one Tutorials - a new user is likely to do so )

I suspect one of the latter, based on Last Class Changed for that image ... but that will be my hunch for now ...

ciao

r
  
   


On 26 February 2014 07:18, Esteban Lorenzano <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 26 Feb 2014, at 11:30, Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]> wrote:

"BTW, Nautilus is stable and used daily by the whole community."

This still rankles ... I have been a Smalltalker since long before Squeak and have been using Pharo since Seaside first ran on it - if not earlier than that ...

I also received from another on the mail list

"and in fact I cannot reproduce it."

"And in fact" is such a wicked rhetorical move ... in a game I have lost all interest in playing now that I am retired.

it is not. 
it was just saying that I tried your problem and I could not reproduce it. It was not to been rethorical or anything, just pointing a fact. 
I’m interested (and is also my job) on having the best and stable version of Pharo possible. 
I’m so interested that I was at 10min from leaving a my house to take an 10h fly and I sit to try to reproduce your problem. 
So, please… do not misinterpret the contents of the mail. It was an attempt to have an understanding of the problem, in an effort to help.
An effort, btw, that sometimes is not easy, because we do not have all the elements to make the diagnostic… 


It may take me a lot of effort to track these 2 bugs down as far as "Follow these steps to reproduce" .. but then I am not a CONSORTIUM member ( I used to pay big bucks for Smalltalk, back in the day ) so may be I am too far outside the "whole community".... btw.

The community is here. In this list. Around the list. 
Consortium is for companies willing to contribute with some money support (and so is the association for individuals), because things cost effort and effort implies time and time implies money. 
We always try to solve the problems of everybody (we, the community, including yourself), because that’s the best for all… so do not put yourself outside in a way we never say/act/even think about. 
We want to help you. 


I will spare you my plot's view of the term "stable" and the notion of stability ... and will be sure I rename key files as I go along ... [ why are we still having to rename files such as these when able to run multiple images in the same dir ? ]

Your pov about stability can be ok. What is not ok is such amount of negativity over a simple fact: we has not been able to reproduce your problem (but you avoid the other obvious fact: we tried to reproduce it. So we did not ignored you).

Again, I try to help, as everybody in the community… but such a negative over-reaction is probably just compared to my own overeacted answer :)

Esteban 
  


ciao



On 26 February 2014 04:36, Sven Van Caekenberghe <[hidden email]> wrote:

On 26 Feb 2014, at 01:57, Robert Shiplett <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I am running from that latest.zip tonight and PackageTreeNautilusUI >>update is getting a walkback messageNoUnderstood for
> receiver of >>protocolsFor: is nil
>
> I simply flipped to class view in Announcements and then flipped that toggle back.
>
> Does this need to be reported, or is Nautilus still known to be unstable ?

I can't reproduce this either, please be more specific.

BTW, Nautilus is stable and used daily by the whole community. Of course, it is a complex piece of code with lots of UI and system interactions, so issues are always possible.

Sven







Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Which one should I download?

Stephan Eggermont-3
In reply to this post by fstephany
Robert,

I’ve looked at your log.
You are using an old VM. (288) Please retry with a newer one (stable/latest)

Stephan
12