Hi Levente, On Oct 17, 2014, at 5:40 AM, Levente Uzonyi <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Thu, 16 Oct 2014, Eliot Miranda wrote: > >> Hi All, >> finally the Spur Squeak trunk image is updateable. The image in >> http://www.mirandabanda.org/files/Cog/SpurImages/2014-10-16/ was created >> today and thanks to Bert Freudenberg's latest Monticello work can >> be updated independently of the non-Spur trunk. Spur VMs are available in >> http://www.mirandabanda.org/files/Cog/VM/VM.r3105/ (and later as they >> appear). Without wanting to appear too overconfident the Spur >> system looks to be ready for use apart from image segments (which I hope to >> have working some time next month). I'm really interested in having this >> stress tested by as many people as possible. Spur really >> does offer a significant performance and functionality improvement over the >> current system, but it needs testing to ensure its reliability. > > Great news. > >> Esteban Lorenzano is hard at work on the Pharo bootstrap for Spur so I hope >> Pharo 4 Spur will be available soon. >> As far as trunk goes, using Spur alongside non-Spur trunk is going to be >> difficult to manage for the near future. Right now, Spur modifies the >> Collections, Compiler, Kernel and System packages, and this is >> done by auto-editing the non-Spur versions of those packages, something I do >> periodically as new versions arrive. I also auto-edit trunk configurations >> (the part of the image update scheme that ensures >> packages are loaded in the right order when there are dependencies between >> packages) from non-Spur "update" to Spur "update.spur" forms. This at east >> means that Spur can keep up with trunk. But it does >> /not/ provide a way of committing to Collections.spur, Compiler.spur, >> Kernel.spur or System.spur without getting out of sync with non-Spur trunk. >> Note that apart from these packages, one /can/ safely commit >> any other package from a Spur image to trunk. >> Right now the plan is to release both V3 (the pre-Spur format) and Spur >> versions of Squeak 4.6 (I hope it'll be called Squeak 5.0). This isn't my >> preference. I'd like to see just Spur released, once >> reliability is verified. But I understand the safety and >> backward-compatibility concerns (Spur won't be able to load V3 image >> segments, and vice verse). The issue is of course that we have this tricky >> package situation to manage where, to keep the two systems in sync, >> modifications to Collections, Compiler, Kernel and System need to be >> committed from V3 and auto-edited to Spur. I think that's too clumsy to >> be practicable. Perhaps allowing the two systems to fork and doing a manual >> merge will be acceptable, but it'll be work to keep them in sync. > > How about releasing the V3 version as Squeak 4.6, and the Spur version as > Squeak 5.0 at the same time? > This way we could keep Trunk as is; pushing all changes to Trunk until 4.6 is > released, then - leaving V3 behind - use the Trunk for Spur-only. > Then any changes could be backported manually to the future squeak46 > repository if needed. Works for me. Good idea! Objections? > Levente > >> -- >> best,Eliot Eliot (phone)
