Re: The 64-bit version is complete
And thanks to you, Robert, as this was all done on your server! Cheers, - Alex -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
Re: The 64-bit version is complete
On Mon, 7 Sep 2009, Alexander Burger wrote: On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 04:28:04PM -0300, TC wrote: I don't see it in the repo, maybe you forgot to _push_? Ah, sorry, then we have a misunderstanding. As far as I remember, we agreed that I will not push ongoing development code (i.e. the 64-bit stuff), and we wait until 3.0 is finished. Sorry, I misunderstood the line: function in the 64-bit version (it was 'commit', btw)! Now the 64-bit I thought the it was 'commit', btw meant you put the changes in the repo. That's all. :) I suggest that we wait till the beginning of October, then set up a fresh initial repository (I considered the current one as experimental) I agree. which will contain the whole system including the 32-bit stuff (but not the 64-bit stuff, as this is still too much in a flow). I'll continue with providing the base system releases, if possible in three-month-cycles as before, and everybody is free to add and maintain extensions in the hg repo. Gd :) Even better I would find if I would not have to care about the hg repo at all, and some of our specialists (tc.rucho, hsarvell, ..) could take the responsibility of adding/updating base system changes to the repo. It's fine by me. No problem. This means that only the responsibility of the base system stays with me, and I would have to implement custom change requests manually as before, but this would save me a lot of time in total. The responsibility for custom extensions and modifications in the repo stays with the individual who initiated them. Is this ok? It's reasonable and fair. I agree. Although it would be nice if core changes were kept in the repository, everyone should be free to work the way they prefer. I'm eager to see what pL will turn into :D (of course, I'll help (how I can and in my way though :P )) -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
Re: The 64-bit version is complete
On Mon, Sep 07, 2009 at 03:12:21AM -0300, TC wrote: ... it would be nice if core changes were kept in the repository, everyone should be free to work the way they prefer. Right, this is better. So I'll keep the repo in sync. I'm eager to see what pL will turn into :D (of course, I'll help (how I can and in my way though :P )) Great. Thanks! Cheers, - Alex -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
Re: The 64-bit version is complete
So is this then the mighty 3.0 release. Congrats Alex and keep up the good work. Rob- Alexander Burger schrieb: Hi all, this morning I finished the implementation of the last remaining function in the 64-bit version (it was 'commit', btw)! Now the 64-bit version should be compatible to the 32-bit version. As we left off for a family trip for the rest of the day, I did not much testing yet. In fact, the whole version underwent only a few smoke-tests so far. During the next weeks want to see how much is working, and whether we detect serious problems. So complete does not mean finished. But if it turns out not too bad, I'll make it official, and increment the picoLisp version to 3.0 with the next release at the end of this month. If anybody dares: It is available in the current testing release :-) Cheers, - Alex -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
Re: The 64-bit version is complete
On Sun, Sep 06, 2009 at 04:28:04PM -0300, TC wrote: I don't see it in the repo, maybe you forgot to _push_? Ah, sorry, then we have a misunderstanding. As far as I remember, we agreed that I will not push ongoing development code (i.e. the 64-bit stuff), and we wait until 3.0 is finished. I suggest that we wait till the beginning of October, then set up a fresh initial repository (I considered the current one as experimental) which will contain the whole system including the 32-bit stuff (but not the 64-bit stuff, as this is still too much in a flow). I'll continue with providing the base system releases, if possible in three-month-cycles as before, and everybody is free to add and maintain extensions in the hg repo. Even better I would find if I would not have to care about the hg repo at all, and some of our specialists (tc.rucho, hsarvell, ..) could take the responsibility of adding/updating base system changes to the repo. This means that only the responsibility of the base system stays with me, and I would have to implement custom change requests manually as before, but this would save me a lot of time in total. The responsibility for custom extensions and modifications in the repo stays with the individual who initiated them. Is this ok? Cheers, - Alex -- UNSUBSCRIBE: mailto:picol...@software-lab.de?subject=unsubscribe
