> 	
>Squeak Maintainence and etc. ; Problem restatement.
>stéphane ducasse ducasse at iam.unibe.ch 
>Thu Jul 27 08:37:36 UTC 2006 wrote: 

>> My goal:
>>
>> 1) In order to research fixes to bugs in squeak I
>> would like to have easy access to the version
history
>> of changed methods. The images with all changes
from
>> 3.0 thru xxxx along with the changes in the current
>> image of 3.9 have been my main tools in doing that
>> research.
>>
>> 2) This is important but not urgent and does not
need
>> to delay you in finalizing 3.9
>
>Ok
>What would be good is to have a DB to which we could
push all the  
>changes of squeak since the beginning.



>
>> 3) If you have complete changes from 6665 (3.8final
=
>> 3.9a first ) in the current 3.9a 7048 (or what ever
>> good version beyond ) then with current resources
my
>> research would require me to fire up an extra image
>> but would be doable.
>>
>> I get from what you asked below that 7048 is
>> essentially equivalent to what I was trying to
>> suggest.
>
>No because we did not start from a full history image
if I remember  
>correctly.

Uhm. I think we’ve run into language problems again
the suggestion I was refering to was
the more recent one:

>>>> Please give consideration to the formula:
>>>> -Create a condensed source version for
Squeak-6665
>>>> (either 3.8 final or 3.9a start).
>>>> -Provide the load scripts to produce 3.9final
with all
>>>> changes from that source.
>>>> -And have that as a deliveralble for the squeak
>>>> maintenence folks.

not the first wish to have a 7048 with all changes
from 3.0. Which is what you would get from loading on
top of a full history image. 

The important thing is to be able to find (in one
image or another ) the versions that lead up to the
current one. And to get the most information out of
them as to what changed; by whom; and to infer for
what purpose.


>
>> And that it is not missing any vital historical
>> information.
>>
>> Is that a correct understanding?
>>
>> **********************
>> **********************
>>
>> 4) Since it would be REALLY HELPFUL to have access
to
>> all version/change infomation in a single search.
The
>> problem becomes is there a simple way to do that
from
>> where we are now.
>>
>>
>> **********************
>>
>> Is 32M a limit for one change file?
>> Can I(or someone with more expericence) modify the
>> version searcher to search more than one changes
file.
>
>Sources are hardcoded in Smalltalk
>look for at: 1 and at: 2
>So this should be changed but with care.

Ok. So I would be possible to experiment,
>
>> E.G. "Hi friendly version searcher most of the
>> information you need is right here in the connected
>> changes file but would you kindly also search file
>> AllChangesUpto6665.changes for versions that
happened
>> before our time?"
>>
>> That would be beautiful. Maybe then we could go
back
>> to version 1.1 and really see how squeak developed.
>> That would really be educational and helpful.
>
>yes.
>The best would be to have an external DB to manage
>all the versions (in addition to changes).

But, not as a first step. (See my other post on this.)


<snip>

Yours in Service, -- Jerome Peace

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com