History and thoughts about "how" we work on the image together

Benoit St-Jean bstjean at yahoo.com
Sat Oct 7 21:21:46 UTC 2006

--- Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
> I know that people bitch and moan about Mantis but
> all I can say is that 
> compared with the alternatives, Mantis is hugely
> advantageous. Even the 
> threshold to post a bug is good in my understanding.
> It makes sure that 
> if you go to the length of reporting a bug (and it's
> really not *that* 
> much effort) you try to provide good and accurate
> information. 9 out of 
> 10 bugs that I come across are clear, obvious, and
> for those that come 
> with a fix the fix is usually just fine the way it
> is. Meaning I can 
> avoid sifting through tons of unrelated emails (the
> BFAV problem) and 
> focus on solving or integrating the fixes. In other
> words, lowering the 
> bar is not necessarily advantageous.

Personally, I think using a bug tracker is a "MUST"
when you're dealing with so much
code/packages/environments/projects...  It gives you
history and traceability among other things (plus easy
reporting, tracking, etc.)

Regarding release 3.9 (I came back to Squeak after a
long pause), what bugs me the most is the fact that a
lot of packages don't load properly (or don't load at
all!) in 3.9.  I've always thought not loading your
code into a clean image prior to releasing is a
capital sin.

Yes, some would say it's easy to whine and complain
but I think we can definitely improve the process and
the user experience with a little more effort here...
like trying to load your packages into a clean

Btw,  since I'm mostly interested in database stuff
(99% RDBMS), I'd volunteer to help/test/document the
ODBC/MySQL/WhateverRelationalDatabase area...

Benoit St-Jean
Yahoo! Messenger: bstjean
A standpoint is an intellectual horizon of radius zero.
(Albert Einstein)

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list