[V3dot10] Other comments regarding 3.10.1gamma progress

[Ken Causey]

On Wed, 2008-05-14 at 06:18 -0300, Edgar J. De Cleene wrote:
> 
> 
> El 5/13/08 5:49 PM, "Ken Causey" <ken at kencausey.com> escribió:
> 
> > OK, here's how I see it.  The old-style changeset-only method has some
> > points in its favor.  I'm not totally oppposed to changing it although
> > that really complicates things for anyone in the future who tries to
> > track down a problem if the history of the problem includes the
> > transition point (from ReleaseBuilder/MCZ to changesets).
> > 
> > But really we must decide now before issuing any more updates what we
> > are going to do.
> > 
> > 1. Change back to ReleaseBuilder.  This would involve updating the
> > relevant packages in the 3.10 source.sqf.repository with the changes
> > that you recently made and then issuing at least one new update that
> > loads the relevant packages.  This update wouldn't really do anything
> > other than update the MCZ history as they would overwrite methods with
> > the exact same versions.
> > 
> > 2. Continue using only changesets.
> > 
> > I don't have a strong opinion which way we go, but I must insist that we
> > decide now and stick to it for the future of all 3.10 development.
> > 
> > Does anyone else on this list have an opinion on the subject?
> > 
> > Ken
> +1
> 
> I do, send the 7165SynchonizeWithRepository.

I'm sorry I don't understand.  Is the +1 in support of either of the two
options or in support of getting other opinions?

And I don't yet see a 7165 update in the updates list.  Did you mean to
attach it to this email or should I just be more patient?

> Old policy means this is how I made things in the Ralph era.
> 
> 7161ObjectFlagFix-M6793-edc touch morphic, I should made a Morphic package,
> upload and load a 1.3 Mb for only change one method.

Yes, the size of the MCZes is certainly a significant vote in favor of
just using changesets.

> That's why I doing Ladrillos , I wish end with Morphic broken in 5 to 7
> logical pieces, less pain IMHO, easing the way to Morphic 3.0.
> We need close work with Juan and convince he of some compromise of his
> current fork.
> He was in both MorphicTeams and in the last I was lucky  in found to Jerome.
> 
> 7162UpdatingMenuItemMorph-target-M6897-wiz same as before
> 7163ScrollBar-init...eMenuButton-M6844-wiz same as before
> 7164fontAvailable-M5309-wiz not only touch Morphic, also touch Graphic-Fonts
> and Multilingual.
> 
> I remember all each time we touch any fonts related with this technique, all
> kinds of weirdness arise.
> 
> And what Ralph era means each time I should run all SUnit (I do in the 3 OS,
> Mac, Windows XP and Linux as README says)

Great, then you are doing better than me as I've so far only bothered to
run it on my primary OS, Linux.  I could also do so on Windows XP but I
don't have access to a Mac.

> I doing this for 18 months when I know in advance , because I made
> SqueakLight and all kinds of experiments, this is not a good way.
> 
> I ask for a compromise and I end with some
>  some like ReleaseBuilderFor3dot10 new loadTogether: #('Morphic-edc.nnn.mcz'
> ' Graphic-Fonts' ' Multilingual') merge: false.
> 
> And do any mumbo jumbo I need to do.
> Also we have the WelcomeWindow question, I sent to list but nobody repply
> saying if like, if enough, if any should be changed.

Yes, I agree that silence is not appreciated.  But I'm afraid that's not
too unusual.  That is one reason I specified May 26th as the deadline so
hopefully that will give people time to look at things and respond with
comments.

> I don't wish ending 10.1 and people still unhappy with WelcomeWindow,
> specially when I send  mails warning this.

Yes.  Well I will make it a point to look at the WelcomeWindow and
perhaps call for more comments.

> I think soon we have a complete image , maybe Squeak3.10-7180-basic.image .
> Also we could have a Squeak3.10WT-7180-basic.image
> WT MEANING WITHOUT TRAITS.

First, be sure to call it Squeak3.10.1-7180-basic.image. ;)

Secondly I'm not sure this is a good time to be pushing the 'remove
traits' policy.  It appears that Matthew and maybe Keith are willing at
least temporarily to maintain a script to remove Traits for those
individuals that wish to do so.  Given that, I see no reason that the
release team (at least for 3.10) needs to publish a traits-free image.

> BRAVO Keith and Matthew , you do a super job and I was happy with
> #unloadTraits ending in 3.10WT (if all agree)
> 
> 
> On 23/5/08, if Lord wish, I become 59.
> 
> Give me a birthday present with the best 3.10.1 all could have NOW.
> 
> Regards and thanks a lot.
> 
> If any was angry with me, I ask pardon.
> 
> Edgar

Congratulations!  I think your birthday present will be a few days late
but I hope it is one you can be proud of when it is ready.

I do get impatient and angry sometimes, and I apologize.  I find it
particularly difficult much of the time to figure out your meanings.  I
would like to repeat Sebastian Sastre's suggestion that you try to avoid
complications like analogies and jokes as these are generally considered
to be some of the most difficult skills to master in a secondary
language.  It would really help me a lot if you could just state things
as simply and clearly as you can.  Also I think my lack of understanding
is sometimes due to typos you have made and I would really appreciate it
if you would proofread your messages a little more carefully.

Thank you,

Ken
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/v3dot10/attachments/20080514/daea4a91/attachment.pgp