[squeak-dev] [Q] Last recommended VM for 3.10 basic ?
Locked
[squeak-dev] [Q] Last recommended VM for 3.10 basic ?
 
|
I just downloaded Squeak3.10-7159-basic.zip and noticed that the image file name inside is 'Squeak3dot10.7159.image', not matching the release name.
As well, will there ever be a different version of 3.10-7159-basic? If so, then there needs to be a version number included. For version 3.9 at <http://ftp.squeak.org/>, we have Squeak3.9-final-7067.zip with Squeak3.9-final-7067.image inside and Squeak3.9.1-final-7075.zip with Squeak3.9.1-final-7075.image inside. So 'final' in the name evidently does not mean anything. The latest dev image is sq3.10-7159dev08.04.1.zip with sq3.10-7159dev08.04.1.image inside. Latest 3.10 dev images do not show up at <http://ftp.squeak.org/>, perhaps they could and should? Versions 3.10 requires version SqueakV39.sources which also is confusing, 3.9 versions also require SqueakV39.sources, however, versions 3.8 and below in the 3.x range require SqueakV3.sources. And then there are the many VM's! Whew... Might I respectfully suggest better standardization and consistency in naming conventions? All these confusing versioning issues could be dealt with in improved fashion. Craig has evidently given versioning some thought: <http://www.netjam.org/versions/>. Ken G. Brown At 5:00 AM -0700 4/10/08, [hidden email] apparently wrote: >Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 06:54:42 -0300 >From: "Edgar J. De Cleene" <[hidden email]> >Subject: [squeak-dev] [Q] Last recommended VM for 3.10 basic ? >To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list > <[hidden email]> >Message-ID: <C4236A32.D28C%[hidden email]> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" > >Folks: > >Seems I should produce the same directory structure of 3.9 release on >http://ftp.squeak.org/3.10/ > >I ask to VM makers (John, Andreas, Ian, others) which one is the last they >advice should be the "official" for put into the dirs. > >Also I beg Sophie and Seaside "OneClickExperience" share with me how put the >needed files into the Mac VM structure for doing some OneClick3.10, could >email private if needed. > >Edgar |
Re: [squeak-dev] [Q] Last recommended VM for 3.10 basic ?
|
|
Generally, use the latest released VM for your platform.
- Bert - On 10.04.2008, at 09:21, Ken G. Brown wrote: > I just downloaded Squeak3.10-7159-basic.zip and noticed that the > image file name inside is 'Squeak3dot10.7159.image', not matching > the release name. > As well, will there ever be a different version of 3.10-7159-basic? > If so, then there needs to be a version number included. > > For version 3.9 at <http://ftp.squeak.org/>, we have Squeak3.9- > final-7067.zip with Squeak3.9-final-7067.image inside and > Squeak3.9.1-final-7075.zip with Squeak3.9.1-final-7075.image inside. > So 'final' in the name evidently does not mean anything. > > The latest dev image is sq3.10-7159dev08.04.1.zip with > sq3.10-7159dev08.04.1.image inside. > > Latest 3.10 dev images do not show up at <http://ftp.squeak.org/>, > perhaps they could and should? > > Versions 3.10 requires version SqueakV39.sources which also is > confusing, 3.9 versions also require SqueakV39.sources, however, > versions 3.8 and below in the 3.x range require SqueakV3.sources. > > And then there are the many VM's! Whew... > > Might I respectfully suggest better standardization and consistency > in naming conventions? All these confusing versioning issues could > be dealt with in improved fashion. Craig has evidently given > versioning some thought: <http://www.netjam.org/versions/>. > > Ken G. Brown > > At 5:00 AM -0700 4/10/08, [hidden email] > apparently wrote: >> Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 06:54:42 -0300 >> From: "Edgar J. De Cleene" <[hidden email]> >> Subject: [squeak-dev] [Q] Last recommended VM for 3.10 basic ? >> To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list >> <[hidden email]> >> Message-ID: <C4236A32.D28C%[hidden email]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" >> >> Folks: >> >> Seems I should produce the same directory structure of 3.9 release on >> http://ftp.squeak.org/3.10/ >> >> I ask to VM makers (John, Andreas, Ian, others) which one is the >> last they >> advice should be the "official" for put into the dirs. >> >> Also I beg Sophie and Seaside "OneClickExperience" share with me >> how put the >> needed files into the Mac VM structure for doing some OneClick3.10, >> could >> email private if needed. >> >> Edgar > > |
Re: [squeak-dev] [Q] Last recommended VM for 3.10 basic ?
|
|
In reply to this post by Ken G. Brown
> For version 3.9 at <http://ftp.squeak.org/>, we have Squeak3.9-
> final-7067.zip with Squeak3.9-final-7067.image inside and > Squeak3.9.1-final-7075.zip with Squeak3.9.1-final-7075.image inside. > So 'final' in the name evidently does not mean anything. It means something. We should remove Squeak3.9.1-final-7075.image Because there was a little glitche on it. I just forget. So of course we forget to follow 3.8 naming convention. Do you know how much time we spent on doing this release? > Versions 3.10 requires version SqueakV39.sources which also is > confusing, 3.9 versions also require SqueakV39.sources, however, > versions 3.8 and below in the 3.x range require SqueakV3.sources. 3.0 is used by 3.1, 3.2,,,, 3.8. What were the other viable solutions? Not delivering 3.9. Fixing the source management and delay the 3.9 release for some extra couples of months? > And then there are the many VM's! Whew... Why the VM are a problem. If there are compatible. We should just create a bundle with the latest compatible VM. Generally, use the latest released VM for your platform. > > > Might I respectfully suggest better standardization and consistency > in naming conventions? All these confusing versioning issues could > be dealt with in improved fashion. Craig has evidently given > versioning some thought: <http://www.netjam.org/versions/>. > > Ken G. Brown > > At 5:00 AM -0700 4/10/08, [hidden email] > apparently wrote: >> Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2008 06:54:42 -0300 >> From: "Edgar J. De Cleene" <[hidden email]> >> Subject: [squeak-dev] [Q] Last recommended VM for 3.10 basic ? >> To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list >> <[hidden email]> >> Message-ID: <C4236A32.D28C%[hidden email]> >> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" >> >> Folks: >> >> Seems I should produce the same directory structure of 3.9 release on >> http://ftp.squeak.org/3.10/ >> >> I ask to VM makers (John, Andreas, Ian, others) which one is the >> last they >> advice should be the "official" for put into the dirs. >> >> Also I beg Sophie and Seaside "OneClickExperience" share with me >> how put the >> needed files into the Mac VM structure for doing some OneClick3.10, >> could >> email private if needed. >> >> Edgar > > > |
«
Return to Squeak - Dev
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |