New SqueakMap on the air... and we got problems Houston!

goran at krampe.se goran at krampe.se
Thu Apr 6 11:45:25 UTC 2006


Hi Andreas!

Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi Goran,
> 
> >> It simply means that older versions of the client are capable of dealing 
> >> with newer data sets coming from the server, so that the clients don't 
> >> need to be updated in sync with the server. There are many good reasons 
> >> for this; the most important one being that people like to be able to 
> >> decide when they want to upgrade instead of being forced to.
> > 
> > Well, I for one don't want to have multiple versions of SM running out
> > there trying to make sense of the model coming from the latest version
> > running on the server. It sounds way too risky for my taste.
> 
> Well, that's like saying it's way to risky that people use different 
> browsers for displaying web content and *force them* to install IE 7 
> when they want to look at a random page.

Well, SM does more than "looking" (if IE 5 renders a page ugly it
doesn't hurt that much - if SM screws up installing things it hurts
more) and I am aiming for it to do even more in the future - actually
modifying the map (getting rid of the web UI for modifying the map and
instead letting client images upload modified SMObjects in XML form - at
least that is the plan this hour).

> And "oh, by the way" one of the 
> reasons why I'm in this discussion is that SM is currently just the 
> icing on the cake of all the issues that I'm dealing with in the Croquet 
> release. Its attempt to forcefully update itself in an environment it 
> knows relatively little about only leads to problems.

I can buy that. But doesn't it actually ask? Anyway, I know what you
mean.

> I'm actually on 
> the verge of removing SM last minute; the way it's right now with the 
> 2.1 client not working and 2.2 failing to install

AFAIK you haven't yet mentioned 2.2 failing to install. I just tried it
though (in Croquet) and I noted you are forbidding underscores as
assignments - that was at least one issue (and I now changed the
underscores in the load script). Hmmm, let me test again btw...

...yes, ok, it works fine (unless I have missed something) if you first
do:

	Preferences enable: #allowUnderscoreAssignment

:)

But I can clean those underscores up of course, anyone got a nice script
that *works* :) to do that?

> it's really not very 
> attractive to carry that much dead code around. (but I'll wait with that 
> decision simply because I had a *very bad* day today and perhaps I feel 
> different later).

Sure.

> > Ok, I understand what you mean - but I still don't like the effects. If
> > we move towards an XML format (which I now really intend to do unless
> > someone comes up with a brilliant alternative) then yes, we would at
> > least have a sporting chance of making the client side "work" with a map
> > coming from a newer server but... it would also mean that different
> > images will behave differently. And it could mean that bugs will pop up
> > like "oh, right, darn, didn't think of that - it works in SM 2.31 and
> > 2.33+ but you are right, it would barf in 2.32".
> 
> Well, isn't that called testing?! ;-) Maybe a few tests would help to 
> automate the process?! ;-))

I know. :) Yes, I should write some tests for SM.

> Actually, I'm only partly kidding - it seems 
> pretty clear that any version you want to support needs at least a 
> rudimentary amount of support and testing but if there are people out 
> there interested in a particular system I'm sure they'll give you the 
> feedback you need.

Sure, but I agree - I should add tests.

> > Sure, I can make the code do a "hey, this tag is odd - lets skip
> > it"-kinda thing, but I still will reserve the "right" for the client to
> > say - "nope, sorry, this model is too new for me, at leat the author
> > thinks so - press yes to go ahead, and have fun in the debugger when SM
> > trashes your image". :)
> 
> And that's perfectly reasonable, though, in my experience fairly 
> unlikely if you start out with the goal of supporting future versions. 
[SNIP]

Well, I am convinced to at least give it a shot. And it will be much
easier when we have moved to a "declarative" format like XML.

regards, Göran



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list