2015-02-08 13:01 GMT+01:00 Tudor Girba <[email protected]>:

> Hi Nicolai,
>
>
>
> On Thu, Feb 5, 2015 at 9:36 PM, Nicolai Hess <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> 14850 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?14850> Integrate GTools
>> #development
>> "From this version onwards the development version should be integrated."
>>
>> Is this a good idea? Does the #development version always include *all*
>> the latest
>> changes, because after Andrei opened
>> 14866 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?14866> Integrate GTools
>> (which got integrated in 40475)
>> I uploaded some changes for issue
>> 14608 <https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?14608>
>> ClassTest>>#testClassRespectsPolymorphismWithTrait failing due to Spotter
>> methods
>> I set the status to "Fix Review needed",
>>
> but my changes are integrated in 40475 too!
>>
>
> I think that in the current situation, it is actually a good idea. And
> yes, the integration does include all latest versions of GT-related
> packages.
>
> Before changing to development, we required a stable release for the
> integration. That implied:
> 1. creating a stable release and
> 2. integrating it in the Pharo through a separate issue.
>
> Yet, in GT we all work on the very latest version, and creating a "stable"
> release is somewhat artificial given the speed at which things are changing
> now. Creating the "stable" version also led to delays between a fix in GT
> and an integration in Pharo (sometimes measured in weeks).
>

It still takes weeks. the last GToolkitCore integration was 3 weeks ago.




> So, in the case of GT requiring the stable release did not provide any
> added value, but it has the negative consequence of delays.
>
> I am not satisfied with the way external packages are handled.
>> 1. if there is not one slice/changeset per issue, it is even less likely
>> someone will
>>     review the changes.
>> 2. you don't know who works when on a issue. They are solved in a bulk.
>> 3. a new configuration might not only includes bugfixes but new features
>> as well.
>> 4. often we have unbound globals / undeclared references or other test
>> failures.
>>
>> Can we use the build server for those external projects (like
>> GToolkitCore, Athens, TxText),
>> and that if a project makes a new configuration, it uses the same
>> issue validator for loading and testing that configuration?
>>
>
> We already have a GToollkitCore job, but it only runs the GT tests.
> Perhaps this is not enough?
> https://ci.inria.fr/moose/job/gtoolkitcore/
>

It would be nice if it runs some of the image validation tests
ReleaseTest
ClassTest
BehaviorTest
...

That way we can we see early enough, if GT-Extensions will break some
validation rules (unresovled externals / Obsolete classes / Polymorphism
Trait/Class)



>
> But, could the Monkey not be able to run all tests before an integration
> of the development version?
>

I don't know if the Monkey can load Configurations.


>
> Cheers,
> Doru
>
>
>
> --
> www.tudorgirba.com
>
> "Every thing has its own flow"
>

Reply via email to