I wasn't able to install the network pre-alpha successfully on 3.4a.

Michael Rueger wrote:

>
> Hi all,
>
> I'm looking for testers for my network rewrite. I just realized, that 
> I didn't take into account some changes to e.g. Celeste that weren't 
> in the image I started with and I'm afraid there will be more glitches 
> like that. And bugs of course.
>
> It would be great if people could enhance the SUnit suites I started, 
> especially adding tests for e.g. Celeste. At least as soon as I fixed 
> those aforementioned glitches.
>
> danielv at netvision.net.il wrote:
>
>> About the general Network stuff, I think you should talk to Craig (since
>> your work probably interacts somehow with Flow), and propose two, or
>> preferably one, action plan on what sockets should look like in 3.4/3.5,
>> and how we get there without messing all the clients up. The more of the
>> discussion happen on squeak-dev, the better.
>
>
> I tried to decouple Socket and client implementation by basing the 
> clients on SocketStream. It should be fairly easy to replace the 
> current Socket implementation with something different (eg. like Flow 
> :-) ) without even touching the rest of the system.
> Craig (Hi Craig :-) ) already responsed in a different mail and we 
> will both work on making the two apporaches cooperate.
> Trying not to step on anybodies toes here but the decision has still 
> to be made if and which parts of flow or my stuff will finally end up 
> in the update stream.
>
>> Small - just posting a fix to SMTP first would make sure it gets the
>> proper attention.
>>
>> Edible - The more you make it clear how to use your version instead of
>> the existing one, the more likely someone will submit a patch to Celeste
>> to use your infrastructure, the more likely some people will switch to
>> using and thus testing it, the more likely it goes in the image.
>
>
> The problem with the rewrite is: it's a rewrite. Patches to anything 
> didn't cut it anymore. I tried to make everything work with the new 
> code, but as stated above, I missed some things and that's also why I 
> need some serious testing by other people on the list.
>
> A "How to" guide is an excellent idea (documentation? I have to look 
> up the meaning of this word... ;-) ).
>
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>
>