Process, harvesting, getting your favorite things in the image

Daniel Vainsencher danielv at netvision.net.il
Mon Mar 10 20:24:57 UTC 2003


<sheepish grin>

Okay, I got caught...

Anyway -
> For what it's worth, I just tried your change sets,
> and ended up with exactly the same results as Brent
> Vukmer - CelesteComposition is trying to define four
> instance variables that are already defined in
> MailComposition. It looks to me like a simple
> oversight - after removing those four variables from
> CelesteComposition, the code filed in cleanly, and I
> can still send messages from Celeste.

Sure, but note that my change sets aren't just removal, they're removal
+ adding a refactored Celeste. So proper testing is (at least) - sending
mail, both through client and through indirect clients like the "tell a
friend feature" and debugger, and then removing Celeste, and making sure
you can still do that, and then adding it back, and making sure it still
works, and further such elbow twisting as it may take to make it do
something nasty.

Murphy is the patron-god of testers...

Daniel
PS - if you want to make a lot of changes to Celeste, then it might be a
good idea to talk about them, since Lex, I think, will want to coevolve
his FilteringCeleste stuff with it, and I want to package up and improve
TimOlsons Bayesian Spam Filter (wonderful stuff, but saving it is too
slow when you use it for more than a couple of months. I want to speed
it by a factor of 10, or make it constant time). I also want to slowly
refactor the MessageFile to be a generic repository, that doesn't know
it's about mail messages (and can maybe be replaced by Magma). If you'll
be the most intensive, maybe you should play integrator.

Adam Spitz <adspitz at yahoo.ca> wrote:
> Daniel Vainsencher wrote:
> 
> > Wonderful, you don't need to write such a script,
> > just help me out with the one that I have made.
> 
> I was hoping someone would say that. :)
> 
> > Do consider that SM has categories for Alpha
> > software. I think it's important to make packages
> > visible, and not conflate this issue with
> > package maturity.
> >
> > Consider the case where someone starts writing
> > a similar framework, because they don't see yours
> > on SM, where they could instead help you mature
> > TW faster.
> 
> Yeah. What you said. :)
> 
> 
> Adam Spitz
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________________________ 
> Post your free ad now! http://personals.yahoo.ca



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list