Hola,
I would like to raise this issue again. It is very annoying having to do a load of the latest moose from here. Simon can attest to this. Having nightly builds available would be a great help. I reiterate my offer to contribute to make this happen.
--
Johan Fabry
jfabry(a)dcc.uchile.cl - http://dcc.uchile.cl/~jfabry
PLEIAD Lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
Hi!
I would like to make explicit and homogenize the license of Moose and
its components.
For example:
- C Analyzer does not have a license (nothing is specified on http://www.moosetechnology.org/tools/canalyzer)
- http://www.moosetechnology.org/about says Moose is available
under the MIT and BSD licenses. Why not having just one? MIT is the
choice of Pharo.
- Glamour has a MIT license, Mondrian a BSD, PetitParser a MIT,
SmallDude a BSD
I am not sentimentally attached to a particular license. I am neither
expert in licensing and maybe these question do not really make sense.
But I am wondering.
Cheers,
alexandre
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
Hi!
The lastest version of Mondrian has a better menu toolbar for the easel.
If there are things you would like to see in this toolbar, we can
discuss.
Cheers,
Alexandre
--
_,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu
^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
I just noticed that ConfigOfSmallDude declares an explicit dependency on two packages, Moose-Core and Famix-Core. I don't think it's good practice, as it could lead to conflict between a version of Moose and a version of SmallDude requiring different package versions.
--
Simon
Hi Doru
I noticed some missing items in the moose bib on the website. I guess it is generated from the scg bib. What could be the best way to keep this bib up to date?
--
Simon
So it should be a quick issue which would improve usability of the finder.
Apparently the bottleneck is at the creation of each group: we have to fill up the runtimestorage of the group and this includes an access to a dictionary. I am pretty sure the dictionary is useless in most case (because it's to retrieve elements by type, and groups usually contain one type of elements)
So, Jannik suggested to cache group creation when importing a model.
Or we can hope that the speed enhancements in pharo 1.1 make the thing better.
--
Simon
Hi all,
I am happy to say that I recruited a student to do some work for me on AspectMaps. I am sad to say that I want to tell him that he can get a Pharo+Moose image from http://hudson.moosetechnology.org/ but I cant because 'Service Temporarily Unavailable'. Any chance for pure happyness soon? Thanks in advance!
--
Johan Fabry
jfabry(a)dcc.uchile.cl - http://dcc.uchile.cl/~jfabry
PLEIAD Lab - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
Did anyone manage to load a clean Moose in Pharo 1.0 RC3?
I tried to load ConfigurationOfPharo first, then Moose, but it looks like it loads some old packages even if I perform loadDefault.
--
Simon
Hi,
I think it would be really cool to extend the faq.
http://www.moosetechnology.org/docs/faq
I don't have time to always follow the mailing list and I think a lot of
interesting questions pass me by. Also I am usually somewhere else in my
head than moose these days so a handy question and answer list would save me
a lot of reasking silly newbie questions.
My common questions at the moment are:
- How do I set Moose to allow me browse the source of the model? ( I know
the answer now :-))
- How do I calculate duplications?
- What does moose consider as a duplication by default?
... and so on.
I know this is a bit of work but we could start and I am volunteering to
contribute.
Cheers,
Orla
Hi,
I see that there are changes that go back and forth in the Cook API.
For example, FAMIXMethod>>sureIncomingInvocations just returned to the
original implementation.
What is happening in this area? :)
Were the original changes of Cyrille just an experiment? If yes, we
should leave them out for now. If no, why is the situation reverted
only for the case of sureIncomingInvocations?
Cheers,
Doru
--
www.tudorgirba.com
"Every thing has its own flow."
