Hi Ben,
reason is that for Pharo 7 currently an sha git hash is used in the file name
instead of a (more clear) build number.
See http://files.pharo.org/image/70/
See http://files.pharo.org/image/70/
This problem (which has more side effects on different sides, not only the Launcher now) was discussed
already yesterday on Discord #iceberg channel with Esteban and Pavel.
already yesterday on Discord #iceberg channel with Esteban and Pavel.
The current sha based image file name scheme is not only confusing but has some downsides.
One can not easily remember the SHA or see which image is the latest, or sort from recent
One can not easily remember the SHA or see which image is the latest, or sort from recent
images to older in a folder.
If I understood correctly the reason to (initially) choose sha's in the image name has something
to do with Travis and a discussion between Pavel, Esteban and Guille.
I would vote for using Build numbers again.
We would have several BENEFITS when keeping/returning to build numbers for Pharo 7:
- we do not change image file names, about box behavior, ... compared to previous Pharo version < 7
(as we used image build number already in the past)
- we tag each release as before and see it in Git (we can easily reproduce)
- the build number easily tells you which image is more recent (as before)
- we can easily sort when we have several images in a directory
- a build number is more readable and recognizable by a human (compared to the shas)
- Pharo is not an "aliens" compared to the rest of the software world as often software
follows a MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH/BUILDNUMBER scheme (see semver.org)
- we do not change the order in Launcher (higher numbers at the top to download more recent)
According to the discussion with Esteban and Pavel it is technically possible to have build numbers again -
it means to tag each commit again with a build number (we already did this for Pharo 6,
see https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/releases)
If I understood correctly the reason to (initially) choose sha's in the image name has something
to do with Travis and a discussion between Pavel, Esteban and Guille.
I would vote for using Build numbers again.
We would have several BENEFITS when keeping/returning to build numbers for Pharo 7:
- we do not change image file names, about box behavior, ... compared to previous Pharo version < 7
(as we used image build number already in the past)
- we tag each release as before and see it in Git (we can easily reproduce)
- the build number easily tells you which image is more recent (as before)
- we can easily sort when we have several images in a directory
- a build number is more readable and recognizable by a human (compared to the shas)
- Pharo is not an "aliens" compared to the rest of the software world as often software
follows a MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH/BUILDNUMBER scheme (see semver.org)
- we do not change the order in Launcher (higher numbers at the top to download more recent)
According to the discussion with Esteban and Pavel it is technically possible to have build numbers again -
it means to tag each commit again with a build number (we already did this for Pharo 6,
see https://github.com/pharo-project/pharo/releases)
The outcome from yesterday was that Pavel will discuss again with Guile on that topic. It would be good if others
could comment on that topic too. Maybe we can return to the known build number scheme
or (if there are problems with that) at least know the arguments why we need to be exotic/different on
or (if there are problems with that) at least know the arguments why we need to be exotic/different on
this corner in the future.
Thanks
Thanks
T.
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 03. August 2017 um 15:41 Uhr
Von: "Ben Coman" <[email protected]>
An: "Pharo Development List" <[email protected]>
Betreff: [Pharo-dev] PharoLauncher - uninformative Pharo7 template names
Von: "Ben Coman" <[email protected]>
An: "Pharo Development List" <[email protected]>
Betreff: [Pharo-dev] PharoLauncher - uninformative Pharo7 template names
Attached is what I see for Pharo 7 images in PharoLauncher.
I presume the top one is the latest, but Its a bit hard to tell :P
Anyone else seeing this?
Loading ConfigurationOfPharoLauncher-ChristopheDemarey.53 (latest)
and doing "ConfigurationOfPharoLauncher loadDevelopment"
and doing "ConfigurationOfPharoLauncher loadDevelopment"
which loads PharoLauncher-Core-ChristopheDemarey.116 (latest)
This is with Pharo builds 60486 and 60510, and same VM for both...
Win32 built on May 31 2017 03:09:04 GMT Compiler: 5.4.0 VMMaker versionString VM: 201705310241
CoInterpreter VMMaker.oscog-eem.2231 uuid: de62947a-7f40-4977-a232-e06a3a80c939 May 31 2017
(but btw, does that look strange? The 60510 image was lauched from the original 60486-PharoLauncher which said it was downloading the matching VM, so I kind of expect each image to have a different VM ?? )
cheers -ben
