bleeding edge vs dev
Locked
 
|
On the CI server there is bleeding edge and a development version :
https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-contribution/job/SciSmalltalk/ What are the differences between these two versions ? Maybe we need a stable configuration ? Regards, -- Serge Stinckwich UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC) Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SciSmalltalk" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [hidden email]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. |
|
|
Dear all,
After investigation, I think we only need two versions for the configuration : - stable with the version 0.8 (currently 0.4, I dunno why) - dev with last version of the packages I will remove the bleeding edge (in fact same version that dev). We should decide from time to time to release a new version. I commit a new version of ConfigurationOfSciSmalltalk with these fixes. Could someone modify the Jenkins configuration in order to have only stable and development versions ? I also push the last ConfigurationOfSciSmalltalk on the Pharo 30 meta repo. Apparently Jenkins server is broken at the moment. Regards, On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 11:52 AM, Serge Stinckwich <[hidden email]> wrote: > On the CI server there is bleeding edge and a development version : > https://ci.inria.fr/pharo-contribution/job/SciSmalltalk/ > > What are the differences between these two versions ? > Maybe we need a stable configuration ? > > Regards, > -- > Serge Stinckwich > UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC) > Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk > http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/ -- Serge Stinckwich UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC) Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SciSmalltalk" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [hidden email]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. |
|
|
Cool. I totally agree with you and I see that someone already changed the configuration.
Uko
-- On 16 Apr 2014, at 11:57, Serge Stinckwich <[hidden email]> wrote:
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SciSmalltalk" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [hidden email]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. |
|
|
In reply to this post by SergeStinckwich
Hi Serge,
-- thanks that you advanced stable to a more stable version <g>. i once wanted to do this too, but before i would have done that, i would have needed some feedback from the other contributors. there was a little difference between bleeding edge and development in so far that development would need a little change by hand in the configuration. the advantage was this: lets say that development was green. you could upload your new version (that was not completely bug-free) without changing that, improve your version later and then drag along the development version. On Wednesday, April 16, 2014 6:52:40 AM UTC+2, Serge Stinckwich wrote: On the CI server there is bleeding edge and a development version : You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SciSmalltalk" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [hidden email]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. |
|
|
On Wed, Apr 16, 2014 at 9:01 PM, werner kassens <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi Serge, Hi Werner, > thanks that you advanced stable to a more stable version <g>. i once wanted > to do this too, but before i would have done that, i would have needed some > feedback from the other contributors. The SciSmalltalk is really small, so I guess we should be do the things instead of talking too much ;-) We can always always go back after that if we made some mistakes. > there was a little difference between bleeding edge and development in so > far that development would need a little change by hand in the > configuration. the advantage was this: lets say that development was green. > you could upload your new version (that was not completely bug-free) without > changing that, improve your version later and then drag along the > development version. At the moment, we have 2 versions : stable (a fix point in time) and development that loads the last version of each packages. I guess development version is what you call bleeding edge. I'm not sure we need to have three differents versions. This add a lot of complexity. Actually development version is for developers, they should know what they are doing. What is really important right now if we want to develop this community is to attract more people. We really need documentation and more libraries ! Do you have any ideas how we could do that ? BTW, i do some noise by advertising the last version on SciSmalltalk twitter's account here: https://twitter.com/SciSmalltalk/status/456377725347827712 Please RT. Thank you for your help. -- Serge Stinckwich UCBN & UMI UMMISCO 209 (IRD/UPMC) Every DSL ends up being Smalltalk http://www.doesnotunderstand.org/ -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SciSmalltalk" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [hidden email]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. |
|
|
Hi Serge,
-- >The SciSmalltalk is really small, so I guess we should be do the >things instead of talking too much ;-) >We can always always go back after that if we made some mistakes. ok, i think i get it. >We really need documentation and more libraries ! >Do you have any ideas how we could do that ? i guess i should upload one or two little things, a function-optimizer and a qr-factorization. the last one could eventually be used to remove a little difficulty, not really a bug, in dhb. the first one would need some documentation, i have not yet made, that would also need several pictures, iow just some tests wouldnt be sufficient. it is my understanding that you want the git side to be used for the docu. well ok, i guess every died in the wool programmer likes to use git because of its admittedly fine logic. it is just that each time i want to upload something, i have to reread its entire docu and write some arcane commands on little papers to conjure git. but then i can eventually cope with that (perhaps i can see what happens, if i omit the ritual trashing of the little papers at the end of this magic procedure). regarding the docu of dhb, as a first step we could write a sentence or so, that dhb is clearly and extensively documented in besset's book and everybody, who wants to know how these dhb things work, should have a look at the book eg in a library. i once talked to msr besset, he is a very fine gentleman, and i certainly will not diminish the value of his book by repeating his work and it is much too much work for me as i'm extremely lazy. Happy Easter werner You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SciSmalltalk" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [hidden email]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. |
«
Return to SciSmalltalk
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |