[Box-Admins] Re: [squeak-dev] Re: [Seaside] SqueakSource/Seaside question - has anyone seen this problem before?

[Chris Muller]

SS3 is already up and running, and all projects which are still alive
in 2014 and care to do so have moved their individual projects to SS3.
 That's a perfect fit for its place in the universe.

I think attempting to cram the rest of the old squeaksource.com model
en masse would be a big mistake.

SS3 is great for external projects.  I have all of mine there now.
But it has had issues in the past which are left to the mercy of
Dale's and Tobias' availability.  I personally think Squeak needs
incentive to stay fit, at least enough to self-host its own code for
source.squeak.org.


On Mon, Jan 13, 2014 at 5:36 PM, David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Jan 14, 2014 at 12:10:56AM +0100, Tobias Pape wrote:
>>
>> On 14.01.2014, at 00:00, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> >> It seems clear (as previously noted) that we really need to update our
>> >> source.squeak.org and squeaksource.com images to use an up to date Seaside.
>> >
>> > A prerequisite to that is to update our source.squeak.org and
>> > squeaksource.com images to be 4.5 images.
>> >
>> > Just FYI -- I've done with the source.squeak.org backup on box4.  It's
>> > running the code which is committed to the "ss" repository of
>> > source.squeak.org (so, self hosting its own code) in a 2-month old
>> > trunk image.
>> >
>> > A future step to update Seaside in there would be nice.
>>
>> Or, y'know, just upgrade to SS3 in the forseable future?
>>
>
> This is going to sound ignorant because it is ... would it be feasible
> to move the current squeaksource.com repository onto SS3 and keep it
> running as if (from the user point of view) nothing had happened?
>
> My goal for squeaksource.com is to keep it reliable and available as a
> resource to the community. I updated it to match the code base for
> source.squeak.org for that reason only. If the repository could be
> moved to SS3 to provide a more reliable system, that might be a very
> good thing.
>
> The only thing from my personal point of view is that I cannot put a
> great deal of time into development or changes to the system. I just
> want squeaksource.com to work and be reliable, that is all.
>
> Dave
>