And another one. That's not cool :-/
At some point I get to RTLabel>>trachelShapeForOneLine: which does a self trachelShapeClass but that is not defined there, so it goes to RTShape where it is implemented as self subclassResponsibility.
-- Does this mail seem too brief? Sorry for that, I don’t mean to be rude! Please see http://emailcharter.org .
Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD and RyCh labs - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
Hi,
Are you on the latest version? Also, which Pharo version?
I saw some comments from Peter saying that the latest changes seem to have some problems, but I did not investigate yet. @Alex?
Cheers, Doru
On Aug 3, 2016, at 4:55 PM, Johan Fabry jfabry@dcc.uchile.cl wrote:
And another one. That's not cool :-/
At some point I get to RTLabel>>trachelShapeForOneLine: which does a self trachelShapeClass but that is not defined there, so it goes to RTShape where it is implemented as self subclassResponsibility.
-- Does this mail seem too brief? Sorry for that, I don’t mean to be rude! Please see http://emailcharter.org .
Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD and RyCh labs - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@list.inf.unibe.ch https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com
"Reasonable is what we are accustomed with."
Yes this is Pharo 5 with the latest version of Roassal. Sorry for not including in the original mails.
-- Does this mail seem too brief? Sorry for that, I don’t mean to be rude! Please see http://emailcharter.org .
Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD and RyCh labs - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
On Aug 3, 2016, at 11:59, Tudor Girba tudor@tudorgirba.com wrote:
Hi,
Are you on the latest version? Also, which Pharo version?
I saw some comments from Peter saying that the latest changes seem to have some problems, but I did not investigate yet. @Alex?
Cheers, Doru
On Aug 3, 2016, at 4:55 PM, Johan Fabry jfabry@dcc.uchile.cl wrote:
And another one. That's not cool :-/
At some point I get to RTLabel>>trachelShapeForOneLine: which does a self trachelShapeClass but that is not defined there, so it goes to RTShape where it is implemented as self subclassResponsibility.
-- Does this mail seem too brief? Sorry for that, I don’t mean to be rude! Please see http://emailcharter.org .
Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD and RyCh labs - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@list.inf.unibe.ch https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com
"Reasonable is what we are accustomed with."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@list.inf.unibe.ch https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 01:49:30PM -0400, Johan Fabry wrote:
latest version
This is the core of the issue.
We can either use #bleedingEdge and slit our wrists with it from time to time (because there are no guarantees), or change ConfigurationOf after every single functional change (so you commit your changes, see the build to pass, then you go back and edit the code again).
(Or use git, but people apparently like the approach above.)
Peter
Thanks Peter for fixing this!
And yes I am aware that I am on a development branch so some instability can happen and functionality can change. So I am OK with that. That being said, committers should ensure that all tests always pass. Situations like this cause time to be wasted and are bad publicity for Roassal.
-- Does this mail seem too brief? Sorry for that, I don’t mean to be rude! Please see http://emailcharter.org .
Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD and RyCh labs - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
On Aug 3, 2016, at 14:27, Peter Uhnak i.uhnak@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 01:49:30PM -0400, Johan Fabry wrote:
latest version
This is the core of the issue.
We can either use #bleedingEdge and slit our wrists with it from time to time (because there are no guarantees), or change ConfigurationOf after every single functional change (so you commit your changes, see the build to pass, then you go back and edit the code again).
(Or use git, but people apparently like the approach above.)
Peter _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@list.inf.unibe.ch https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
Unfortunately we cannot do much better with SmalltalkHub/Monticello, because it doesn't have any real support for parallel development, as the latest version is whoever happens to be winning the branch race condition, and you will see if your code passed all tests only after you've broken the master build, because there is no simple way to test it before integration. Add the mind-bending complexity of configurations and you have fun for a lifetime.
So yes, we will waste some time from time to time if the build breaks in such proportions, but I don't really see a better solution without a better infrastructure and tools.
P.s.: One more option that came to my mind was having CI automatically update ConfigurationOfRoassal if the build passed, but I don't know how to do that (yet).
Peter
On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 08:33:12PM -0400, Johan Fabry wrote:
Thanks Peter for fixing this!
And yes I am aware that I am on a development branch so some instability can happen and functionality can change. So I am OK with that. That being said, committers should ensure that all tests always pass. Situations like this cause time to be wasted and are bad publicity for Roassal.
-- Does this mail seem too brief? Sorry for that, I don’t mean to be rude! Please see http://emailcharter.org .
Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD and RyCh labs - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
On Aug 3, 2016, at 14:27, Peter Uhnak i.uhnak@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 01:49:30PM -0400, Johan Fabry wrote:
latest version
This is the core of the issue.
We can either use #bleedingEdge and slit our wrists with it from time to time (because there are no guarantees), or change ConfigurationOf after every single functional change (so you commit your changes, see the build to pass, then you go back and edit the code again).
(Or use git, but people apparently like the approach above.)
Peter _______________________________________________ Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@list.inf.unibe.ch https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@list.inf.unibe.ch https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
A lot of code was removed in the last commit(s) (I guess because the author committed without checking what will happen).
I've reverted the broken changes, so the build is now green. I had to commit four separate commits for my "branch" to take precedence as the latest commit... what a great design!
Maybe we should switch to git. :p
Peter
On Wed, Aug 03, 2016 at 05:59:43PM +0200, Tudor Girba wrote:
Hi,
Are you on the latest version? Also, which Pharo version?
I saw some comments from Peter saying that the latest changes seem to have some problems, but I did not investigate yet. @Alex?
Cheers, Doru
On Aug 3, 2016, at 4:55 PM, Johan Fabry jfabry@dcc.uchile.cl wrote:
And another one. That's not cool :-/
At some point I get to RTLabel>>trachelShapeForOneLine: which does a self trachelShapeClass but that is not defined there, so it goes to RTShape where it is implemented as self subclassResponsibility.
-- Does this mail seem too brief? Sorry for that, I don’t mean to be rude! Please see http://emailcharter.org .
Johan Fabry - http://pleiad.cl/~jfabry PLEIAD and RyCh labs - Computer Science Department (DCC) - University of Chile
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@list.inf.unibe.ch https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
-- www.tudorgirba.com www.feenk.com
"Reasonable is what we are accustomed with."
Moose-dev mailing list Moose-dev@list.inf.unibe.ch https://www.list.inf.unibe.ch/listinfo/moose-dev
-
Johan Fabry -
Peter Uhnak -
Tudor Girba