Hi Norbert,

Le 19 févr. 2014 à 13:32, Norbert Hartl a écrit :

> Is anybody using Versionner in 3.0? I would be really interested in some 
> success reports. In my case I cannot achieve much with it.

People just start to use Versionner since it was integrated lately (vm problem).

> I really don’t get when it is creating a baseline version and when a static 
> version. Releasing a valid baseline produces a static version that looks good 
> but also it creates a new baseline. Why?

baseline = dev version
numbered version = release

A project evolves or is ... dead (kind of).
That's why a new development version is always generated after a release.
I had a discussion with Damien this morning. He argued that Versionner should 
be able to able to reuse baselines until there is a change to this baseline ... 
and is right (need to work on that).
To avoid problems, Versionner now always create a new baseline for the next 
development version.

> Because creating a baseline in any of my projects lead to a bogus 
> configuration. Versionner rewrites project dependency wrongly (projects are 
> named after configurations and not after names I give them. loads: directives 
> are stripped off but references in the rest of the configuration are not 
> changed accordingly).

Yes, you reported this bug: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/12903.
I will work on this one tomorrow.

> In my current project it creates a baseline with the same version as a static 
> version that already exists. 
static version => release
baseline => new dev version

> It is a shame because it looks so good but all the funtionalities do not work 
> in my projects except „commit the project“. I hope I’m doing something wrong 
> but then I downloaded a fresh pharo 3.0 this morning and loaded my config and 
> went from there.

Are there some other bugs not reported?

> How to proceed? What kind of test case should I deliver. I think Versionner 
> is pretty important and I should be usable in 3.0.

Reporting bugs and provide a way to reproduce is a good start point.

Thank you for taking time to test and to report problems,
Christophe.

Attachment: smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature

Reply via email to