did snapshotcello worked on ConfigurationOfMoose?

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

did snapshotcello worked on ConfigurationOfMoose?

Stéphane Ducasse
Hi doru

did you succeed to snapshotcello worked on ConfigurationOfMoose?

Stef
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: did snapshotcello worked on ConfigurationOfMoose?

Tudor Girba-2
Version 4.9 was done using Snapshotcello.

Did you stumble across a problem?

Doru


On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 11:03 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]> wrote:
Hi doru

did you succeed to snapshotcello worked on ConfigurationOfMoose?

Stef
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev



--

"Every thing has its own flow"

_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: did snapshotcello worked on ConfigurationOfMoose?

Stephan Eggermont-3
In reply to this post by Stéphane Ducasse
Snapshotcello is currently only partially useable for managing Moose versions.
It provides a snapshot of the loaded versions of all packages, but doesn't know
to which groups & projects they belong. By flattening that data, further
development becomes practically impossible. We notice that when bug fixes no longer
get propagated, or the number of snapshots gets impractically large. A new snapshot
would be needed for each fix in each of the dependencies. I consider storing snapshots in
a configuration not a good idea. A flattened snapshot is fine for producing a reproducible
load, and is valuable as a separate object.

In Seaside we noticed that referring to versions as #stable and #development
is not enough, we need to make explicit that it is the stable #release3 #release3.0
or #release3.1. Bugs are fixed in those releases, and no APIs are changed in
3.0/3.1.
Referring to #stable of Seaside in your configuration is a potential bug, as it
will lead to a different version, with a different API, getting loaded when Seaside 3.2
is released.

I expect most projects will be better off separating bug fixes from feature development.
 
Stephan
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
[hidden email]
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev