On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 4:50 PM, Ben Coman <btc at openinworld.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 13, 2015 at 4:15 AM, David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com>
> wrote:
> >> Hi All,
> >>
> >>
> >>     Fabio's kindly done most of the changes.  But some questions remain
> >> for
> >> more general discussion.  See below.
> >>
> >> Fabio,  thanks so much for doing this, and so quickly!
> >>
> >> On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 8:51 PM, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com
> >
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi All,
> >>>
> >>>     who will update http://squeak.org/downloads/ to include the 5.0
> >>> release?
> >>>
> >>> a) I suggest that the 5.0 all-in-one have a line in the left-hand table
> >>> that includes the 4.6 release and that it precede the 4.6 release in
> the
> >>> list.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Done.
> >>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> b) the Trunk link points to TrunkImage.zip which contains a non-Spur
> >>> image.
> >>>
> >>
> >> So this is the biggie.  What should we do?
> >>
> >> - add a Trunk 5.0 build with a different link?  (Noooooo)
> >>
> >> - change  http://build.squeak.org/job/SqueakTrunk to build what it says
> >> (Yessss please, who can do this?)
> >>
> >> - add a Squeak 4.6 build job?  Is that even worth it any more
> considering
> >> 4.6 is released and stable?  If it is then what should it build?  David?
> >
> > I think that if we have a job called "SqueakTrunk" then it should be
> > building the actual current trunk image, which is a 5.0 Spur image.
> >
> > Ideally I would suggest renaming the current "SqueakTrunk" job to
> > something like "SqueakTrunk_Old".
>
>
> "Old" things sometimes get mistreated (e.g. accidental deletion,
> confused with other "old" things over years.)
> How about something topical like SqueakTrunk_V3Legacy?
> cheers -ben
>

+1

Or SqueakTrunkV46?


>
>
> > Leave it disabled until it gets fixed,
> > and if it does not get fixed in a reasonable time (say a month or two)
> > then delete it. Meanwhile get new new job up and running for the real
> > SqueakTrunk builds.
> >
> > I do not know how that Jenkins job is maintained (it's done in a Ruby
> make
> > system, which is over my head), so treat this just as an opinion.
> >
> > Dave
>
>


-- 
_,,,^..^,,,_
best, Eliot
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20150812/d0afc4ce/attachment-0001.htm