Re: Re: Refactor tag

Stephane Ducasse wrote:
> 
> After thinking about it I think that having [KCP][ENH] would be the
> best.

Sounds fine.

> Note that while cleaning we are also removing bugs. Such as sending a
> message isMeta to behavior breaks, or other methods calling method only
> defined in subclasses.
> 
> Is it ok for you?

That is fine, too.  If you can keep the bug fixes in separate changesets from
the refactorings, that would be best.  Although I realize this is not always
possible.

- Doug
From [email protected] Wed Apr 09 05:21:46 2003
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Delivered-To: [email protected]
Received: (qmail 1802 invoked from network); 9 Apr 2003 05:21:45 -0000
Received: from mailhost1-sfldmi.sfldmi.ameritech.net (HELO
	mailhost.det2.ameritech.net) (206.141.193.105)
	by mail.theinternetone.net with SMTP; 9 Apr 2003 05:21:45 -0000
Received: from riskmetrics.com ([66.72.184.202])
	by mailhost.det2.ameritech.net
	(InterMail vM.4.01.02.17 201-229-119) with ESMTP
	<20030409052139.HTYH8853.mailhost.det2.ameritech.net@riskmetrics.com>;
	Wed, 9 Apr 2003 01:21:39 -0400
Date: Wed, 9 Apr 2003 01:21:38 -0400
Subject: Re: [Squeakfoundation]How to proceed for the kernel cleaning
	harvesting
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v551)
To: Discussing the Squeak Foundation
	<[email protected]>
From: Doug Way <[email protected]>
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.551)
cc: Alexandre Bergel <[email protected]>
cc: Roel Wuyts <[email protected]>
cc: Nathanael Scharli <[email protected]>
cc: Noury Bouraqadi <[email protected]>
X-BeenThere: [email protected]
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Discussing the Squeak Foundation
	<[email protected]>
List-Id: Discussing the Squeak Foundation
 <squeakfoundation.lists.squeakfoundation.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation>,
	<mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lnx-12.ams-2.theinternetone.net/pipermail/squeakfoundation>
List-Post: <mailto:[email protected]>
List-Help: <mailto:[email protected]?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation>,
	<mailto:[email protected]?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 09 Apr 2003 05:21:46 -0000


Okay, this sounds like a pretty good process.

I guess Daniel is sort of promising to look at these bundles of=20
changesets from the KCP as they come in?  If we want to have a=20
reasonably quick turnaround for these changes, it probably is good to=20
have one harvester that promises to review them, so that they aren't=20
ignored accidentally.

On the other hand, if someone like Noury is already externally=20
reviewing these and adding comments, then perhaps it would be=20
sufficient for Daniel or anyone to "rubber stamp" these as approved=20
without looking too hard at them.  (It would need to be clear from the=20=

comments that they were really externally reviewed, of course.)  But if=20=

Daniel is able to review them himself, that is ideal.

These will still follow the usual harvesting process steps which I=20
posted about yesterday at http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3152 .

For example, I see that Daniel has already [approved] one item=20
(rmSubclassModule).  According to the process, this will sit around for=20=

at least 3 days to see if anyone objects to it, and if no one does, it=20=

will go into the update stream.

Hopefully this process will be fast enough for what Stephane has in=20
mind.

(I see that the Morphic Cleanup Project (MCP) folks are now submitting=20=

changesets.  Ideally, it might be good to have an "interested=20
harvester" devoted to looking at those, too...)

- Doug


On Sunday, April 6, 2003, at 07:16 PM, Daniel Vainsencher wrote:

> Ok, now we're talking.
>
> Send in a mail with changesets 9,7,4, and I'll approve them, I've
> already seen that part. The others until 10 are either tests (which no
> longer go into the image, since we'll be removing SUnit into a=20
> package),
> or your internal tools, or already in the image.
>
> When you've reviewed another bunch, let me know which.
>
> Daniel
>
> Stephane Ducasse <[email protected]> wrote:
>> Ok so let us know. I think that making a try  on the current changes
>> could help to tighten the process and see if we can work this way.
>> What I suggest is the following (depending on the availability of
>> Noury's and Roel's time there is a deadline for ESUG for the end of=20=

>> the
>> week)
>>
>> 1. we proceed to an internal/external review as soon as possible.
>> 2. we let you know.
>> 3. you try to assess the changes as fast as you can and report how we
>> can improve communication.
>> 4. If in the meantime you/harvesters evaluate the proposed changes
>> which are simple (the only design point is that we introduced a new
>> class for the navigation and UI related actions that the tools can
>> reuse), and accept them we just pass to the next ones.
>>
>>
>> Stef
>>
>>
>>
>> Prof. Dr. St=E9phane DUCASSE
>> http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~ducasse/
>>   "if you knew today was your last day on earth, what would you do
>> different? ...  especially if,
>>   by doing something different, today might not be your last day on
>> earth" Calvin&Hobbes
>>
>> "The best way to predict the future is to invent it..." Alan Kay.
>>
>> Open Source Smalltalks: http://www.squeak.org,
>> http://www.gnu.org/software/smalltalk/smalltalk.html
>> Free books for Universities at
>> http://www.esug.org/sponsoring/promotionProgram.html
>> Free Online Book at
>> http://www.iam.unibe.ch/~ducasse/WebPages/FreeBooks.html
>> _______________________________________________
>> Squeakfoundation mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation
> _______________________________________________
> Squeakfoundation mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation