Back-ends for Monticello?

John M McIntosh johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com
Sat Apr 7 20:53:22 UTC 2007


On Apr 7, 2007, at 11:06 AM, brad fowlow wrote:

> Howdy...
>
> Looking for recent experiences/opinions.
>
> We're using Monticello for a lot of source that gets a fair bit of  
> update
> (maybe a dozen checkins a day,
> into a set of maybe 50 packages in 5 or 6 repositories.)
>
> We've been using squeak source as the backend, on a Linux box.
>
> Every few days, the 'lost it, spin out of control at 99% CPU'  
> problem strikes
> the source server, and someone has to ssh to it, kick it over,
> and then e-mail everyone to check that their recent checkins made,
> reminding the recalcitrant to 'Flush Cache Versions', and so on.


Gee that would be like the Sophie Project.
Gee one of our grumpy gray-bearded men guys offered one Million Euro  
to have someone fix it.
Gee there where no takers.
Gee he didn't have one million euros anyway.

Gee the Unix Socket code has some sort of problem that needs fixing.  
There are some fixes proposed
to accept processing queuing problems, but  they've never made the  
main source tree.

--
======================================================================== 
===
John M. McIntosh <johnmci at smalltalkconsulting.com>
Corporate Smalltalk Consulting Ltd.  http://www.smalltalkconsulting.com
======================================================================== 
===





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list