starting to think about 1.1 freeze
Locked
starting to think about 1.1 freeze
 
|
Hi
we started with the guys here to look at the tests that fail in 1.1. We started to fix some of them. Now I would like to have a roadmap for freezing 1.1 - Green tests. - No Preferences. - What are the key other things that we want to get done in 1.1? Stef _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: starting to think about 1.1 freeze
|
|
Stef,
I will soon reach a point of missing a way to do callbacks. Alien/FFI is listed among the goals, and I would very much like to see that happen, especially if callbacks are well supported as a result. Bill -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Stéphane Ducasse Sent: Friday, April 23, 2010 12:50 PM To: Pharo Development Subject: [Pharo-project] starting to think about 1.1 freeze Hi we started with the guys here to look at the tests that fail in 1.1. We started to fix some of them. Now I would like to have a roadmap for freezing 1.1 - Green tests. - No Preferences. - What are the key other things that we want to get done in 1.1? Stef _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: starting to think about 1.1 freeze
|
|
Yes alien should be on the list.
Thanks for the reminder. On Apr 23, 2010, at 8:30 PM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: > Stef, > > I will soon reach a point of missing a way to do callbacks. Alien/FFI is listed among the goals, and I would very much like to see that happen, especially if callbacks are well supported as a result. > > Bill > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Stéphane Ducasse > Sent: Friday, April 23, 2010 12:50 PM > To: Pharo Development > Subject: [Pharo-project] starting to think about 1.1 freeze > > Hi > > we started with the guys here to look at the tests that fail in 1.1. > We started to fix some of them. Now I would like to have a roadmap for freezing 1.1 > > - Green tests. > - No Preferences. > - What are the key other things that we want to get done in 1.1? > > Stef > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: starting to think about 1.1 freeze
|
|
In reply to this post by Schwab,Wilhelm K
On Apr 23, 2010, at 8:30 PM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: > Stef, > > I will soon reach a point of missing a way to do callbacks. Alien/FFI is listed among the goals, and I would very much like to see that happen, especially if callbacks are well supported as a result. > But what we should *not* do is to delay the release for that. Releases should be a snapshot of what is already done. 1.1 *as it is now* (minus bugs) is already a huge step forward. If we delay that to make it even better, we will again delay the release for a looong time. I vote for just defininf 1.1 as what 1.1 is *now* and stabilize it. There will be a 1.2 anyway. Marcus -- Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: starting to think about 1.1 freeze
|
|
ok but this is still good to know what we could wrap up.
Now I'm fixing some tests if somebody wants to help there are some problems on weak structures. Stef On Apr 24, 2010, at 10:31 AM, Marcus Denker wrote: > > On Apr 23, 2010, at 8:30 PM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: > >> Stef, >> >> I will soon reach a point of missing a way to do callbacks. Alien/FFI is listed among the goals, and I would very much like to see that happen, especially if callbacks are well supported as a result. >> > > But what we should *not* do is to delay the release for that. Releases should be a snapshot of what is already done. 1.1 *as it is now* (minus bugs) is already a huge step > forward. If we delay that to make it even better, we will again delay the release for a looong time. > > I vote for just defininf 1.1 as what 1.1 is *now* and stabilize it. There will be a 1.2 anyway. > > Marcus > > > > -- > Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de > INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: starting to think about 1.1 freeze
|
|
In reply to this post by Marcus Denker-4
Ok when do we code freeze 1.1?
mid may? Stef > > On Apr 23, 2010, at 8:30 PM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: > >> Stef, >> >> I will soon reach a point of missing a way to do callbacks. Alien/FFI is listed among the goals, and I would very much like to see that happen, especially if callbacks are well supported as a result. >> > > But what we should *not* do is to delay the release for that. Releases should be a snapshot of what is already done. 1.1 *as it is now* (minus bugs) is already a huge step > forward. If we delay that to make it even better, we will again delay the release for a looong time. > > I vote for just defininf 1.1 as what 1.1 is *now* and stabilize it. There will be a 1.2 anyway. > > Marcus > > > > -- > Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de > INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: starting to think about 1.1 freeze
|
|
In reply to this post by Stéphane Ducasse
Stef,
What do you mean by "weak structures?" Weak collections? Bill -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Stéphane Ducasse Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 3:58 AM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] starting to think about 1.1 freeze ok but this is still good to know what we could wrap up. Now I'm fixing some tests if somebody wants to help there are some problems on weak structures. Stef On Apr 24, 2010, at 10:31 AM, Marcus Denker wrote: > > On Apr 23, 2010, at 8:30 PM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: > >> Stef, >> >> I will soon reach a point of missing a way to do callbacks. Alien/FFI is listed among the goals, and I would very much like to see that happen, especially if callbacks are well supported as a result. >> > > But what we should *not* do is to delay the release for that. Releases > should be a snapshot of what is already done. 1.1 *as it is now* (minus bugs) is already a huge step forward. If we delay that to make it even better, we will again delay the release for a looong time. > > I vote for just defininf 1.1 as what 1.1 is *now* and stabilize it. There will be a 1.2 anyway. > > Marcus > > > > -- > Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord > Europe. Team RMoD. > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: starting to think about 1.1 freeze
|
|
WeakKeyDictionary, to be specific.
To be frank, to me the new implementation in 1.1 seems simply broken. Cheers, Henry Den 24. apr. 2010 kl. 22.58 skrev "Schwab,Wilhelm K" <[hidden email] >: > Stef, > > What do you mean by "weak structures?" Weak collections? > > Bill > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [hidden email] [mailto:pharo- > [hidden email]] On Behalf Of Stéphane Ducasse > Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 3:58 AM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] starting to think about 1.1 freeze > > ok but this is still good to know what we could wrap up. > Now I'm fixing some tests if somebody wants to help there are some > problems on weak structures. > > Stef > On Apr 24, 2010, at 10:31 AM, Marcus Denker wrote: > >> >> On Apr 23, 2010, at 8:30 PM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: >> >>> Stef, >>> >>> I will soon reach a point of missing a way to do callbacks. Alien/ >>> FFI is listed among the goals, and I would very much like to see >>> that happen, especially if callbacks are well supported as a result. >>> >> >> But what we should *not* do is to delay the release for that. >> Releases >> should be a snapshot of what is already done. 1.1 *as it is now* >> (minus bugs) is already a huge step forward. If we delay that to >> make it even better, we will again delay the release for a looong >> time. >> >> I vote for just defininf 1.1 as what 1.1 is *now* and stabilize it. >> There will be a 1.2 anyway. >> >> Marcus >> >> >> >> -- >> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord >> Europe. Team RMoD. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: starting to think about 1.1 freeze
|
|
Not to be inflammatory, the weak collections have been broken all along. They are not thread safe, and so cannot hope to be adequately cleaned as objects are finalized. My efforts to compensate have been aimed at clearing away nils that are left behind. If the weak collection itself is busted (holds too strongly??), then my additions are not going to help.
Bill -----Original Message----- From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Henrik Johansen Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 5:07 PM To: [hidden email] Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] starting to think about 1.1 freeze WeakKeyDictionary, to be specific. To be frank, to me the new implementation in 1.1 seems simply broken. Cheers, Henry Den 24. apr. 2010 kl. 22.58 skrev "Schwab,Wilhelm K" <[hidden email] >: > Stef, > > What do you mean by "weak structures?" Weak collections? > > Bill > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [hidden email] [mailto:pharo- > [hidden email]] On Behalf Of Stéphane Ducasse > Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 3:58 AM > To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] starting to think about 1.1 freeze > > ok but this is still good to know what we could wrap up. > Now I'm fixing some tests if somebody wants to help there are some > problems on weak structures. > > Stef > On Apr 24, 2010, at 10:31 AM, Marcus Denker wrote: > >> >> On Apr 23, 2010, at 8:30 PM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: >> >>> Stef, >>> >>> I will soon reach a point of missing a way to do callbacks. Alien/ >>> FFI is listed among the goals, and I would very much like to see >>> that happen, especially if callbacks are well supported as a result. >>> >> >> But what we should *not* do is to delay the release for that. >> Releases >> should be a snapshot of what is already done. 1.1 *as it is now* >> (minus bugs) is already a huge step forward. If we delay that to make >> it even better, we will again delay the release for a looong time. >> >> I vote for just defininf 1.1 as what 1.1 is *now* and stabilize it. >> There will be a 1.2 anyway. >> >> Marcus >> >> >> >> -- >> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord >> Europe. Team RMoD. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
Re: starting to think about 1.1 freeze
|
|
In reply to this post by Henrik Sperre Johansen
ok may be we should rollback
We should also include the network changes made in 1.0 to roll back IVP6 > WeakKeyDictionary, to be specific. > To be frank, to me the new implementation in 1.1 seems simply broken. > > Cheers, > Henry > > Den 24. apr. 2010 kl. 22.58 skrev "Schwab,Wilhelm K" <[hidden email]>: > >> Stef, >> >> What do you mean by "weak structures?" Weak collections? >> >> Bill >> >> >> >> >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Stéphane Ducasse >> Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 3:58 AM >> To: [hidden email] >> Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] starting to think about 1.1 freeze >> >> ok but this is still good to know what we could wrap up. >> Now I'm fixing some tests if somebody wants to help there are some problems on weak structures. >> >> Stef >> On Apr 24, 2010, at 10:31 AM, Marcus Denker wrote: >> >>> >>> On Apr 23, 2010, at 8:30 PM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: >>> >>>> Stef, >>>> >>>> I will soon reach a point of missing a way to do callbacks. Alien/FFI is listed among the goals, and I would very much like to see that happen, especially if callbacks are well supported as a result. >>>> >>> >>> But what we should *not* do is to delay the release for that. Releases >>> should be a snapshot of what is already done. 1.1 *as it is now* (minus bugs) is already a huge step forward. If we delay that to make it even better, we will again delay the release for a looong time. >>> >>> I vote for just defininf 1.1 as what 1.1 is *now* and stabilize it. There will be a 1.2 anyway. >>> >>> Marcus >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de INRIA Lille -- Nord >>> Europe. Team RMoD. >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
«
Return to Pharo Smalltalk Developers
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |