Update stream ideas for 3.8 (was Re: Squeak 3.8 status)
Avi Bryant
avi at beta4.com
Thu Aug 12 17:19:09 UTC 2004
On Aug 11, 2004, at 11:32 PM, Doug Way wrote:
> It sounds like we have at least two competing proposals (with some
> parts not completely defined) that we can throw tomatoes at, or
> suggest distinct alternatives...
>
> Proposal #1:
> - Have two update streams, "unstable" and "testing". Serious problems
> can be fixed in the "unstable" stream before they reach the
> more-widely-used "testing" stream.
> - The updates from the unstable stream will be moved over to the
> testing stream periodically, when things are stable.
>
> Proposal #2:
> - Have one update stream as we do now.
> - Anyone committing (broadcasting) to the update stream has to run
> SUnit tests. (which take a couple minutes).
<snip>
> Which proposal is the Simplest Thing That Could Possibly Work? You
> could make a case for either one. They're really a lot closer to each
> other than they are to the current process, anyway... either way,
> changes will be appearing in the update stream much more quickly.
> Proposal #2 actually has the fastest turnaround to the main update
> stream.
I think the key thing here is that this is an experiment - we don't
actually know how it's going to turn out, and chaos and breakage is
actually pretty likely. As such, it should probably be done in a way
that doesn't affect anyone that doesn't explicitly choose to get
involved. That's why I suggest we do it on a separate stream: the main
update stream can continue more or less as it does today, with the
unstable stream only affecting the few brave folks that actively choose
to point their images to it.
Avi
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|