29 Dec
2018
29 Dec
'18
10:59 p.m.
Hi,
There are projects that do evolve separately such as: GtExamples, DeepTraverser, NeoCSV,
XMLParser and SmaCC. As it stands now, the versions from Moose are forks of the code
maintained by the original authors. For example, in GT we already use GtExamples,
DeepTraverser and SmaCC. To play with the new FAMIX and GT, we will have to fork the code
from the Moose repo. At the very least, you can still introduce fine grained baselines in
the same repository.
Ok. Good to know.
Doru
On Dec 29, 2018, at 10:28 PM, Stéphane Ducasse
<stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote:
In fact you did communicate between yourselves only not on chat but on the whiteboard :).
In any case, I was not complaining. I was just stating that we cannot contribute in the
current arrangement.
Hi,
Yes, I saw the activity in the GitHub repositories. Unfortunately, the concrete path is
not communicated and as a consequence we cannot contribute.
So funny from you. I could have said: "we communicate by chat and we have no
roadmap” :) but this is not true: I can reexplain our plans the number of times it is
necessary.
May I remind you that Pavel presented his work at ESUG during two years and that you came
at Lille in September to discuss with us.
Nothing has changed since then. We just communicate less because we are focusing on
Pharo70 and preparing Pharo80a.
Yes, sure. I was waiting for some news about a state that is usable.
We created
Releaser and this can be used to reliably release nested projects residing in different
repositories. I believe the reason why everything is in on repository in Moose was to
limit the different repositories problem. Perhaps that can be revisited now.
I do not think so. We pay a too large burden and energy to fake modularity.
Moose is not moving enough to deserve this. I do not know what are the limits of releaser to be
able to pronounce myself.
Of course. We announced when we met in Lille that we will produce a tool that can address
the nested projects problem. We think we have a solid basis now, and it would be
worthwhile to investigate it.
A key aspect to make this work smoothly is to not rely on Groups, but instead rely on fine
grained Baselines. It works for GT, and we have deep nesting and projects spread over many
repositories with a mix of projects with fix dependencies and dependencies to latest
master version.
As for the new
UI: what do you have specifically in mind?
Exactly what I told you in September/October.
Get rid of Glamour (since it is not maintained and we want to be able to debug our tools)
and (re)-write a new Moose UI using a new version of Spec.
So we are working on Spec2.0 and cleaning Moose. Stef
--
www.feenk.com
“Programming is executable philosophy."
Cheers,
Doru
--------------------------------------------
Stéphane Ducasse
http://stephane.ducasse.free.fr
http://www.synectique.eu / http://www.pharo.org
03 59 35 87 52
Assistant: Julie Jonas
FAX 03 59 57 78 50
TEL 03 59 35 86 16
S. Ducasse - Inria
40, avenue Halley,
Parc Scientifique de la Haute Borne, Bât.A, Park Plaza
Villeneuve d'Ascq 59650
France
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev On Dec 29, 2018, at 1:16 PM, Stéphane Ducasse
<stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr> wrote:
Thanks doru.
We would like to release Moose 70 with the two years of work of Pavel for the metamodel
and all the current effort
to package Moose.
With Pharo80, we are also working on new Moose UI (since Glamour is not maintained and we
need something better)
so that we can build fast analysis tools. I would like to get some momentum around the
new tooling
because we need to rebuild all the UI.
Stef
--
www.feenk.com
"No matter how many recipes we know, we still value a chef."
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev Hi,
The mails we send here or on the Pharo mailing list about GT are limited to announcements
and replies related to issues and questions that people raise. We do this mostly so that
we do not create an unnecessary schism and keep a communication channel open, as you asked
us to.
We will soon create a separate forum for more detailed GT conversations.
Cheers,
Doru
> On Dec 29, 2018, at 11:21 AM, Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr>
wrote:
>
> Hi doru
>
> Would it be possible to have a separate mailing-list for GT?
>
> Stef
> --------------------------------------------
> Stéphane Ducasse
> http://stephane.ducasse.free.fr
> http://www.synectique.eu / http://www.pharo.org
> 03 59 35 87 52
> Assistant: Julie Jonas
> FAX 03 59 57 78 50
> TEL 03 59 35 86 16
> S. Ducasse - Inria
> 40, avenue Halley,
> Parc Scientifique de la Haute Borne, Bât.A, Park Plaza
> Villeneuve d'Ascq 59650
> France
>
> _______________________________________________
> Moose-dev mailing list
> Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
> https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--
www.feenk.com
"To utilize feedback, you first have to acquire it."
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
--------------------------------------------
Stéphane Ducasse
http://stephane.ducasse.free.fr
http://www.synectique.eu / http://www.pharo.org
03 59 35 87 52
Assistant: Julie Jonas
FAX 03 59 57 78 50
TEL 03 59 35 86 16
S. Ducasse - Inria
40, avenue Halley,
Parc Scientifique de la Haute Borne, Bât.A, Park Plaza
Villeneuve d'Ascq 59650
France
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)list.inf.unibe.ch
https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev