Adrian

lukas was frustrated because he could not have the last version of the tools 
like RB, helvetia working in 1.1 and 1.0
I think that this is not something that you can expect. Else we can just stop 
Pharo now and go to 
do something else. 

This is why tools should work on a stable version and be marked tools for 
Pharo1.0
and brnaching to have tools for pharo1.1

Stef


On Dec 20, 2009, at 7:53 PM, Adrian Lienhard wrote:

> Version 1.0 is the one to work with, to build and maintain tools for,  
> etc. Unless you work on the Pharo base system there is no good reason  
> to use 1.1 at the current time. It is unstable and it is going to  
> change. Furthermore, nobody can expect that external packages are  
> already flawlessly working with the moving target 1.1. At a later  
> point when 1.1 is getting stable it makes sense to move over from 1.0  
> and make your packages, applications etc. work with the new version.
> 
> I don't know the details and context of the discussion that Stef  
> posted. But I assume that it also concerns packages that are in Pharo  
> (i.e., packages that are added to PharoCore). There we have a slightly  
> different situation because these packages are part of the Pharo image  
> and hence also need to follow its release regime. That is, for the  
> release of Pharo 1.0, the added packages need to be in a stable state.  
> The versions of the packages used in Pharo should not add new features  
> since post release 1.0 there should only be few updates for critical  
> fixes.
> 
> Adrian
> 
> On Dec 20, 2009, at 19:16 , Hernán Morales Durand wrote:
> 
>> Hi,
>> can you clarify what is a frozen 1.0 and which is the stable Pharo
>> image to use as a base system to develop tools? (I cannot mantain my
>> packages for both 1.0 and 1.1, it's a lot of work)
>> Thanks
>> 
>> Hernán
>> 
>> 2009/12/20 Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]>:
>>> I sent that to the list because this is really important.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>>> one of these days we will have to have some pharo specific tools.
>>>> 
>>>> There will be nobody that maintains them. There will be nobody  
>>>> that takes responsibility and that writes and runs tests. You can  
>>>> see that with Davids browser, it is dead. You can see that with  
>>>> Services, they are dead. And many others ...
>>> 
>>> Yes but pharo is moving so slowly we will get more people taking  
>>> care of packages.
>>> 
>>>> But that is not the real problem. And I didn't mean Squeak  
>>>> (although that's a problem too, but I personally don't care). What  
>>>> I ment is the difference between Pharo 1.0 and Pharo 1.1.
>>> 
>>> You lost me there :)
>>> 
>>>> These two versions are killing any progress on the tool front and  
>>>> makes any maintainer of external packages a lot of pain.
>>> 
>>> Why
>>> why don't you freeze a version for pharo1.0
>>> Else we can just stop now.
>>> because this will be the same with pharo1.1 and 1.2 and 1.0
>>> 
>>>> I spent the complete Thursday and Friday trying to get Helvetia  
>>>> running in Pharo 1.1, but that doesn't work because it requires  
>>>> some significant changes in packages like the Refactoring Rngine,  
>>>> the AST, Shout, eCompletion and OB that are also supposed to work  
>>>> on Pharo 1.0.
>>> 
>>> No there are not supposed to work in 1.0
>>> CERTAIN frozen versions are supposed to work on 1.0 and others won't.
>>> A lot of software on mac does not run automatically on snowleopard  
>>> and 10.2
>>> 
>>> Tell me if Im wrong but we should use release and version.
>>> 
>>>> Adding the category dialog to OB makes it depend on 1.1, thus  
>>>> people cannot use it in 1.0 anymore. So the category dialog can  
>>>> maybe happen in a year from now. I cannot use 1.1 at the moment, I  
>>>> am stuck with the frozen 1.0 version.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Pharo-project mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pharo-project mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project


_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

Reply via email to