Squeakfoundation October 2003

squeakfoundation@lists.squeakfoundation.org

16 participants
18 discussions

RE: The Harvesting process and the BFAV
by Daniel Vainsencher 17 Oct '03

17 Oct '03

This is good to hear. You've been very good at incorporating people enhancements, fixes and feedback, and using MC will make things more transparent and integration more smooth, making it easier for people to help you even more. Might even be more fun! :-) Daniel Brent Vukmer <bvukmer(a)blackboard.com> wrote: > Regarding improvements to the BFAV client; before the BFAV goes into the > image, the client needs some major re-working on both the UI and model > packages. I have almost completed re-working the model. I have yet to > re-work the UI code. I have slotted some time this weekend to do some > coding on version 2 of the BFAV client. > > Regarding opening up BFAV client: I would *love* to open up BFAV client > development via a Monticello repository -- especially since I have > failed spectacularly at making time to work on the BFAV.. > BFAV-client-Monticello-repository-sharing will happen just as soon as I > figure out how to work with Monticello. > > Cheers, guys. Hope to be back in the swing of things soon, > B > > _______________________________________________ > Squeakfoundation mailing list > Squeakfoundation(a)lists.squeakfoundation.org > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation

1 0

Re: The Harvesting process and the BFAV
by Daniel Vainsencher 17 Oct '03

17 Oct '03

Hi Ken. First of all, of course we'll defer to your judgement - the last thing we want to do is create new problem, I'm just trying to make things easier. Here're a few things to consider - 1. The BFA has two primary clients - "mail (changeset) to list", and the BFAV. We control the code for both, and neither is currently inclined to send anything to both addresses. We can make sure both continue to send to only one of them. 2. Two mailing lists vs one mailiing list and one address listened to just by the server - seems to me the latter option has the same limitations as the former in terms of duplication, but has the disadvantage of not being accessible by means other than the BFA server. Archives, Google... this is all good. 3. Message-id: <1066324314.994.6.camel(a)12-222-173-196.client.insightbb.com> allows duplicate elimination, if it turns out to be needed to be pretty trivial. So it seems to me that having another list would not hurt, and might help. So you just let us know. If you still prefer the solution you mention, please let know, I'll adapt the BFAV patch I'd prepared to use those addresses. About the new header, we can adopt whatever header scheme you guys agree on, as long as it doesn't stop us from dealing with historical messages that don't have it. Daniel Ken Causey <ken(a)kencausey.com> wrote: > I don't have time just at the moment to address all of this but I would > like to request that we NOT start another mailing list. I want to > discourage this because once two mailing lists exist to which BFAV > traffic can be sent then the BFAV server must subscribe to both lists.=20 > We will very quickly find people sending traffic to both lists and then > it will become necessary to start checking the history of received > messages to be sure that a new message is not a repeat. I see no reason > that posts that do not need to go to the mailing list can not be > perfectly well archived within Bert's bug/fix archives and within the > new BFAV server. I haven't done the work to accept such messages > directly into the BFAV yet but it's just a matter of a few minutes to do > so. > > While on this subject I would like to request that we adopt a more > intention revealing method of indicating that a message is intended to > be archived into the bug system than the List-Id: header. Perhaps > something like > > X-Squeak-Archive-BugFix: Yes > > Additional data, if needed, could be appended to this as desired. > > Ken > > --=-yQzINoO3J8+P7KVy85kb > Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc > Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- > Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) > > iD8DBQA/jtFZ//qOUj3eKgMRAmD/AJ9u4f/dANc97QXt+U3GoziKpTtc3wCgjLAV > Riy3k7isheCKSK15DDRsUtY= > =JLsg > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- > > --=-yQzINoO3J8+P7KVy85kb-- > > > --Boundary_(ID_lsbqCGy56fnLNSPuYxCjOw) > MIME-version: 1.0 > Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT > > _______________________________________________ > Squeakfoundation mailing list > Squeakfoundation(a)lists.squeakfoundation.org > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation > > --Boundary_(ID_lsbqCGy56fnLNSPuYxCjOw)--

1 0

RE: The Harvesting process and the BFAV
by Brent Vukmer 16 Oct '03

16 Oct '03

Let me piggyback onto Ken's post. Ken is the designer and maintainer behind the new BFAV server - so I automatically defer to him about server-side issues. I'm just working on the client. Regarding improvements to the BFAV client; before the BFAV goes into the image, the client needs some major re-working on both the UI and model packages. I have almost completed re-working the model. I have yet to re-work the UI code. I have slotted some time this weekend to do some coding on version 2 of the BFAV client. Regarding opening up BFAV client: I would *love* to open up BFAV client development via a Monticello repository -- especially since I have failed spectacularly at making time to work on the BFAV.. BFAV-client-Monticello-repository-sharing will happen just as soon as I figure out how to work with Monticello. Cheers, guys. Hope to be back in the swing of things soon, B

1 0

Rx: VICODIN is Here - Just Pennies per Tablet.................. wzxqmoekmbr
by Eunice Bass 10 Oct '03

10 Oct '03

1 0

INVESTORS: TRHL - Last Pick From $.45 to $1.18.......... pbxibf xmaos zqmks
by Sterling Tyson 09 Oct '03

09 Oct '03

1 0

[ANN] Squeak 3.6 released! and IRC release party
by Doug Way 06 Oct '03

06 Oct '03

3.6 is now available on the squeak.org downloads page, and is thus officially released! Göran suggested we have a sort of release party for 3.6 on the squeak IRC channel, which sounded like a fine idea. So, it will be tomorrow (Tuesday) from noon to midnight GMT. (8am to 8pm EDT.) Let's get a bunch of people on the squeak IRC channel chatting about Squeak! Of course, anyone can join the squeak channel at any time, but it might be fun to have a larger crowd for half a day. If you haven't tried IRC before, see http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/1915 . If you run into a problem, reply to this thread and someone should be able to help. - Doug

1 0

Abut harvesting
by ducasse 06 Oct '03

06 Oct '03

Hi guides I want to bring up some issues about harvesting. The only thing now that I can tell is that (we discussed about that with marcus) is that there is not enough people looking at the changes and there is not enough harvesters because both of us are bad in concurrency, network, morph, etoy. Therefore we can spend hours looking at code without getting something done. So I do not really know how far we can go like that. I was thinking that we could have tags for the enh/fix [Concurrency] [Morph] [] so that we can dispatch them to a coherent stream. We will try with marcus to go over all the fix pending since january 2003 but I think that we should have a better commitment (easy to say). Then there is the problem of KCP: if daniel is swamped and nobody looks at the change I do, they will not get harvested. Luckily for those one, I have the impression that this is really the space in with marcus evolve. So I do not know what to do but I have the impression that we should have a call of harvester in dedicated areas. else we will lose a lot of good stuff. I would like from you guide to set up a focus. If you say ok guys now the key think is the babel stuff. Then let us stop the rest and fix, evaluate babel. I have the impression that if we work on target-based we can get more good feeling to have achieve something. Having no pending fix is good too but ... stef

1 0

3.6 final release preparation
by Doug Way 03 Oct '03

03 Oct '03

Just some notes on what we need to do for the 3.6 release. - Planned release date this Friday Oct 3rd ("first friday"), or thereabouts. - I will prepare final image(s). (just the gamma images with welcome windows tweaked again) - 3.6 VMs should be ready... VM maintainers will need to provide a version to include. (Windows, Mac OS X, Linux at least) - 3.6 bundles from final full-images & VMs will need to be created, and the squeak.org downloads page updated. Bruce has coordinated this in the past, I believe. Also probably add a small comment/link somewhere to a basic image. (The download-page-as-swiki-page idea will have to wait for now.) - After the downloads page is updated, Cees will do the usual PR/announcements about the release. Will need a 3.6 release blurb for this... this could be put together from the release info I put on this page: http://swiki.squeakfoundation.org/squeakfoundation/79 Let me know if I forgot anything. :-) - Doug

3 4

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

Squeakfoundation October 2003