[squeak-dev] squeak52 repository oddities (was: Condensing sources for a new release)

David T. Lewis lewis at mail.msen.com
Fri Feb 7 17:47:34 UTC 2020


On Thu, Feb 06, 2020 at 10:13:53PM -0800, tim Rowledge wrote:
> 
> 
> > On 2020-02-06, at 6:03 PM, David T. Lewis <lewis at mail.msen.com> wrote:
> >  And if it is a lot of work and/or
> > confusion, then the best thing for 5.3 is don't worry about condensing
> > the sources for this release. It's definitely a "nice to have" and not
> > a requirement for Squeak 5.3.
> 
> Oh, definitely. The *important* thing here is actually that we have three problems revealed by this experiment - 
> a) somehow an update ended up in the 52 update stream but did not get into the trunk stream and so gets missed out. It's not a fantastically crucial change fortunately but it illuminates a process fault we need to care about
> 


I looked through all the packages in the squeak52 repository, and found
a number of inconsistencies. In the squeak52 repository from our last
release, we have:

  EToys-asarch.338 - Not present in trunk, empty commit notice, and no
  code changes.
  
  GraphicsTests-jpl.47 - Not present in trunk, empty commit notice, and
  no code changes.
  
  Installer-Core-cmm.427 - Not present in trunk. I think this is actually
  the same as Installer-Core-dtl.425 in trunk. The one in squeak52 has an
  earlier commit date than the one in trunk. IIRC, this was an emergency
  fix to make the squeak52 update stream function, which explains why it
  appears there first. I think that I did the actual changes on this, and
  probably had them sitting in the inbox. Chris may have put them in
  squeak52 as a hot fix to get the update stream working. A bit messy,
  but at least it's explainable.
  
  SMBase-tpr.141 - Not present in trunk. Contains changes that presumably
  should be in trunk.
  
  WebClient-HTTP-ph.7 - Not present in trunk. Commit notice says "added a
  method for times feed" but there are no actual code changes.


So there appear to be three junk commits with no actual content, one
messy but explainable package discrepancy, and one commit that should
be pulled into trunk immediately after the 5.3 release.

The three junk commits should probably be left in place, since they
are harmless and are probably present in a lot of package-cache directories,
but it would be good to understand how they got there.

Dave



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list