[Vm-dev] [Pharo-dev] ftp repositories broken

Esteban Lorenzano estebanlm at gmail.com
Wed Apr 5 06:23:02 UTC 2017


> On 4 Apr 2017, at 20:56, Nicolas Cellier <nicolas.cellier.aka.nice at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> 2017-04-04 20:03 GMT+02:00 Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com <mailto:eliot.miranda at gmail.com>>:
>  
> 
> 
> On Tue, Apr 4, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Denis Kudriashov <dionisiydk at gmail.com <mailto:dionisiydk at gmail.com>> wrote:
> 
> 2017-04-04 18:45 GMT+02:00 Esteban Lorenzano <estebanlm at gmail.com <mailto:estebanlm at gmail.com>>:
>> > I think you are wrong because I check it carefully in Squeak and I found it on github https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/search?utf8=✓&q=primitiveFindSubstring&type= <https://github.com/OpenSmalltalk/opensmalltalk-vm/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=primitiveFindSubstring&type=>.
> 
> still is not there, because is not the same primitive :)
> 
> Does it also means that latest VM is built differently then stable? (primitive works on stable pharo). I just thought that we already moved to opensmalltalk build process.
> 
> Not yet.  We are close. Last week I got angry with Esteban because I thought that the joe was stalled because Pharo didn't want to move to opensmalltalk-vm, but I over reacted.  One of the issues preventing the move was indeed this primitive and the fact that someone, without thinking to talk to anyone working with the VM, renamed the primitive, and then someone put it on the wrong class.  Esteban and I have spent some hours trying to work around such issues.  I wish people would be more considerate.
> 
> If issues like this can be resolved we are very close to using the opensmalltalk-vm process for stable Pharo VMs.  Esteban wants (and has built) a test build that tries to produce sources and generate Vs and runs tests every time VMMaker is committed.  On the Squeak side we only try and build VMs when opensmalltalk-vm is committed in git.  I don't want to stand in Esteban's way.  I *do* want stable VMs to be built from the opensmalltalk-vm tree.
> 
> _,,,^..^,,,_
> best, Eliot
> 
> 
> +1
> The faster we get the feedback the better.
> So the Pharo VM has to be built on opensmalltalk-vm
> 
> If Pharo people wants to have a fork for mastering their release cycle, (the officially released VM) that's understandable.
> If Pharo people wants to have a better automation with VMMaker code generation (maybe in a dev branch) and non regression tests that's all good.
> 
> It's just that we should integrate back any improvment and fix ASAP.
> It would be even better to commit those fix in opensmalltalk-vm directly (feature branch and/or pull request)
> 
> BTW, don't forget Ronie as a referent Pharo VM developer :)

we all agree with that. 
thing is: 

- we still want to have a CI process running which covers all the stages of VM development: source generation, compilation, test. 
- we have a different packaging policy (basically we push to different places).

now, I do not see why that cannot coexist with opensmalltalk-vm, after all the work made this year (and believe me, it was A LOT of work). 

Esteban

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/vm-dev/attachments/20170405/aa331cb6/attachment.html>


More information about the Vm-dev mailing list