[squeak-dev] [Cuis] Cuis
keith
keith_hodges at yahoo.co.uk
Fri Jan 22 12:55:30 UTC 2010
On 22 Jan 2010, at 12:25, David T. Lewis wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 22, 2010 at 01:12:34AM +0000, keith wrote:
>>
>> The same goes for bug fixes. Previously we had 100 fixes ready to
>> load
>> into 3.10 from mantis, all documented, and supplied in their natural
>> form "changesets".
>
> This is a misconception that really does deserve comment. Those "fixes
> ready to load" contained errors, pointed to incomplete and obsolete
> versions of patches, and could not possibly have functioned properly
> had they been loaded into multiple flavors of the image. The assertion
> that this strategy was going to work is complete utter nonsense, as
> is the claim that the project was "almost done".
>
> Regardless of any real or perceived injustices, the plain simple fact
> is that the emperor had no clothes.
>
> Dave
Incorrect, it worked for me for several years. I produced the first
proposed 3.9.1 using this process with bob version 1 in 2006.
LPF used this process successfully, in all versions of squeak for what
is now several years.
Squeak 3.10-build included an additional 17 of those fixes.
(When you have a fix that works, you keep the date stamp to ensure
someone doesn't change it form under you)
My working images had been running with many of those fixes over and
above the 17 mentioned above) for many months. The only difference
being that I hand scripted the fixes I wanted because the automatic
interface to mantis had not been completed.
With monthly release cycle you only need to have 100-200 fixes per
cycle, and you are making reasonable progress. I agree that if you try
to go 12 months managing potential fixes this way you will probably
run into problems.
regards
Keith
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|