On 24 February 2012 20:48, Schwab,Wilhelm K <[email protected]> wrote: > Sig, > > Fair enough. I find 1..3 to unstable, and the thrashing sounds about right. > For now I am trying to carve a home in 1.4. >
i don't think it is fair labeling 1.3 unstable. It is quite stable and worked well for me. Now there's always space for improvement, but that's doesn't nullifies the quality of previous hard work of many people (pharo 1.3, 1.2 , 1.1, 1.0 squeak etc..) > Bill > > > > ________________________________________ > From: [email protected] > [[email protected]] on behalf of Igor Stasenko > [[email protected]] > Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 1:37 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] [Bug Tracker] Issues tagged 1.3 > > On 24 February 2012 16:11, Schwab,Wilhelm K <[email protected]> wrote: >> Guys, >> >> I'm hoping Sig will see this an immediately know what is at play. I don't >> even know if there is a fix, but there appears to be in 1.4. If backporting >> that to 1.3 is feasible, it should be done. I *think* I know some keywords >> that might pull his relevant reply (something like "you are a victim of") >> from the archive. Can't do it right now. >> > i remember it. > And no, i don't see why these changes are needed to be backported to 1.3. > It was : > http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=5167&q=finalization&colspec=ID%20Type%20Status%20Summary%20Milestone%20Difficulty > > and fix which were integrated was about improving a situation with > runaway processes and interrupt handling. > > Now, that bug entry is still not closed, becaue we have to deal with > so-called "finalization trashing", whether it is real issue or not. > As to me, this is not an issue, because finalization "trashing" is a > consequence but not the cause. And since it is better to fix the cause > instead, that what i actually did. > And then during integration i made a mistake in one method (an > overlooking), causing debugger to not open, but it is already > reverted. > All this is related to 1.4 bleeding edge, not to 1.3. > And i personally don't see good reason porting it to 1.3. It is not > critical. We just improved this part a bit. So, the new pharo version > is naturally better than older one.. that's why we got versions > and development process. :) > If we would start backporting everything, then we don't need versions > anymore. We then will just have single image and fight with all > dragons at once. > >> BTW, I took Stef's reply and used it to good effect - might have even >> figured out why I couldn't build images. All part of testing. If you look, >> you'll find code of mine in the image. Have you noted some of my responses >> to help others - probably not. But I would rather not play "I haven't seen" >> games. >> >> Bill >> >> ________________________________________ >> From: [email protected] >> [[email protected]] on behalf of Sven Van >> Caekenberghe [[email protected]] >> Sent: Friday, February 24, 2012 6:02 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] [Bug Tracker] Issues tagged 1.3 >> >> On 24 Feb 2012, at 11:12, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: >> >>> There is a tracker entry, but please understand it's the middle of the >>> night here and I'm in and out. I think Sig will know the details more off >>> the top, otherwise I'll search later. Would you rather I say nothing about >>> a known bug? >> >> I can't find anything with Schwab, Bill or Wilhelm in any issue ever in >> http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/list (there are a handful that are >> more than half a year old, magically you even received help). I read this >> mailing list all the time, I can't remember seeing a concrete, reproduceable >> bug report. Please, correct me if I am wrong. >> >> Some, like Stef, even took the trouble of trying to load some of the stuff >> that was causing you trouble, only to report that it worked for them. >> >> I and many others ask for help and report problems here all the time. It is >> incredible how people spring up all the time to help others with both simple >> and deep problems. It is often so that the one reporting a problem did >> something wrong himself, I am guilty here as well, but even then people took >> the trouble to look and give some of their valuable time. >> >> The way you ask the question makes a huge difference: provide details, make >> it reproduceable, don't include negative stuff. >> >> I'll make you a promise: I'll give you some of my personal time to try >> whatever you report next as 'BAD bug, makes 1.3 unstable, rendering the >> image useless', provided there is a description of how I should do it. >> >> Sven >> >> >> >> >> >> > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko. > > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
