Re: Squeak downloads
"PhiHo Hoang" <[email protected]> Fri, 20 Jun 2003 00:28:29 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.lang.smalltalk.squeak.foundation |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <014001c336e4$66767af0$1000a8c0@insearch> |
Hi Andreas,
> The download area at the Swiki also means we have a more
> level playing ground for alternative ports (you may see that one
> entry lists MobVM which is otherwise impossible to find).
Thanks for your thoughtful consideration. It's really appreciated.
Obviously, as someone already pointed out, there are certain issues
that need to be resolved before we can have our cake and eat it too.
I, for one, am looking forward to enjoy the cake (and wouldn't mind
some extra icing ;-)
I do believe that the Squeak community will come up with something.
Cheers,
PhiHo.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Andreas Raab" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, June 19, 2003 11:46 AM
Subject: [Squeakfoundation]Squeak downloads
Hi Guys,
I had recently the need to review the download and installation of Squeak on
various platforms and to be honest - it's a mess. If you try to find your
way around Squeak.org's download area you get lost so incredibly fast, it's
amazing that some people manage to get Squeak anyways.
Since I know that all of you are busy, I've done some work on it. My
proposal is to link from Squeak.org directly into the main Squeak Swiki and
there, provide a download page as can be seen at:
http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3262
Let me say a few words about what I'm trying to do here.
First of all, the point is to download Squeak not to look at funny pictures.
The eye-candy at Squeak.org is certainly nice but when it comes to download
we want those files - and nothing more. So there are quite deliberately no
icons on this page.
Secondly, I think people often look for documentation of Squeak most of
which is found at the Swiki. Hosting the download page at the Swiki itself
means that *everyone* who has ever downloaded Squeak has seen the Swiki at
least once. That's what the first sentence in the above is for - so people
know they are now at the right place. In addition, using a Swiki means we
can much more easily change and update things. When a new version gets out
we just change it and then, as the latest platform bundles come in, update
the information appropriately. The download area at the Swiki also means we
have a more level playing ground for alternative ports (you may see that one
entry lists MobVM which is otherwise impossible to find).
About the contents of the download table:
* "full" means a bundle that absolutely includes everything you need to run
Squeak. As we don't provide this for all packages we may have some missing
entries. However, it's a Swiki so it's simple for people to make one up on
their own and we just link it.
* "image" means image+changes+sources for the listed "stable" version of
that platform. Nothing is more bothering than to see that a BeOS port exist
but not to know what one needs to download.
* "stable VM" means the latest stable VM known to run well for the listed
stable version of Squeak. Therefore, "image" + "stable VM" is everything you
need if you haven't a full package available
* "VM source code" explicitly links to the source code for the VM in
question. Many people find it extremely hard to find the sources for VMs so
here we can point them directly towards it.
In addition, we have an "info" link which allows us to link to specific
places for some VM/port. This allows us to decouple the primary download
place from information such as port maintainer, release notes, specific bits
about the platform. All of this is useful information but it should be
hosted elsewhere.
Based on the above download page, I figure that a new Squeak release process
(exemplified with 3.6) would consist of the following steps:
a) we make a copy of the current download page and name it appropriately
(such as "DownloadsForSqueak3.5") - this is now a "previous version"
b) change the latest stable version and link to the previous version. In
effect this means you can always wander backwards through all the old
versions and get - for example - exactly the "right" VM for Squeak 3.2 or
so. Therefore we only need to link to some previous versions here.
c) Update the links for the "primary" full/image packages which Bruce
handles.
>From here on, we can leave everything as is. If we have some platform
maintainer who wants to update his or her port, she can simply update "her
row" in the table. So it's a very simple, straightforward and obvious
process which means that if people are interested they have a single place
where they can download about everything that's interesting about Squeak.
What do you think?
Cheers,
- Andreas
_______________________________________________
Squeakfoundation mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation
From [email protected] Fri Jun 20 05:55:58 2003
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Delivered-To: [email protected]
Received: (qmail 11425 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2003 05:55:57 -0000
Received: from mxout4.netvision.net.il (194.90.9.27)
by mail.theinternetone.net with SMTP; 20 Jun 2003 05:55:57 -0000
Received: from aSqueakSystem ([80.178.96.131]) by mxout4.netvision.net.il
(iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.14 (built Mar 18 2003))
with SMTPA id <[email protected]> for
[email protected]; Fri,
20 Jun 2003 08:58:29 +0300 (IDT)
Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2003 14:38:20 +0200
From: Daniel Vainsencher <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Squeakfoundation]KCP & 3.6
To: Discussing the Squeak Foundation
<[email protected]>
Message-id: <[email protected]>
X-Mailer: Celeste 2.0.5174
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
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://lists.squeakfoundation.org/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: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 05:55:58 -0000
Doug Way <[email protected]> wrote:
> On the subject of KCP, if we want to get another batch of KCP updates in
> before 3.6 goes beta, we should probably do that soon. I'll leave it to
> Daniel to coordinate harvesting/approving that. (Realistically I think
> we need to have one harvester in charge of these types of cleanup
> projects... it would be difficult to rely on the regular harvesting
> process to individually approve a bunch of cumulatively dependent
> changesets.)
I've waited before doing the next batch of approvals, in case someone
wants to help with reviewing the stuff. So far we don't have any
volunteers, so I'll see if I can get in a few hours of review+approvals
sometime next week. Considering the feature-deprecating nature of KCP,
I'd prefer to not continue bring in that stuff in beta.
> Speaking of 3.6beta, technically the planned date for this is in two
> days, this Friday the 20th. But I think we could be a little flexible
> with that date, since we're now finally moving with harvesting stuff...
> definitely move to beta sometime next week though. We should still keep
> our final date of August 1st, though, unless we agree now to postpone it
> for some reason.
I would be partial to postponing beta start by up to one week, without
postponing release (yet). I'm not big on playing around with schedules,
but since we're still experimenting in this area, so it doesn't seem
like a big deal.
As to beta itself, I'd say that during it what we should focus on doing
is that everyone that maintains/uses packages and can afford to help,
should move to using it (if up to now they were using 3.5), and then we
harvest only not-too-risky bug fixes. Another things that I would like
to see happen is that we get a lot of
A. Tests submitted to Marcus' test package.
B. Fixes to everything that's red in Marcus' test package.
Having the test package green at every release sounds like good practice
to me.
Daniel
From [email protected] Fri Jun 20 05:55:58 2003
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Delivered-To: [email protected]
Received: (qmail 11437 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2003 05:55:58 -0000
Received: from mxout4.netvision.net.il (194.90.9.27)
by mail.theinternetone.net with SMTP; 20 Jun 2003 05:55:58 -0000
Received: from aSqueakSystem ([80.178.96.131]) by mxout4.netvision.net.il
(iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.14 (built Mar 18 2003))
with SMTPA id <[email protected]> for
[email protected]; Fri,
20 Jun 2003 08:58:30 +0300 (IDT)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 08:25:38 +0200
From: Daniel Vainsencher <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Squeakfoundation]Squeak downloads
To: Discussing the Squeak Foundation
<[email protected]>
Message-id: <[email protected]>
X-Mailer: Celeste 2.0.5174
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
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://lists.squeakfoundation.org/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: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 05:55:58 -0000
I like the design. The security concerns seem a bit bogus to me - the
download page was always on the swiki, and it's not that hard to change
the link to point to some "warez" FTP site full of appropriately named
trojans. Harder than with the new scheme, but not very hard.
I think we can switch to this layout, and handle security lazily - start
worrying after the first attack.
Daniel
Andreas Raab <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Guys,
>
> I had recently the need to review the download and installation of Squeak on
> various platforms and to be honest - it's a mess. If you try to find your
> way around Squeak.org's download area you get lost so incredibly fast, it's
> amazing that some people manage to get Squeak anyways.
>
> Since I know that all of you are busy, I've done some work on it. My
> proposal is to link from Squeak.org directly into the main Squeak Swiki and
> there, provide a download page as can be seen at:
>
> http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/3262
>
>
> Let me say a few words about what I'm trying to do here.
>
> First of all, the point is to download Squeak not to look at funny pictures.
> The eye-candy at Squeak.org is certainly nice but when it comes to download
> we want those files - and nothing more. So there are quite deliberately no
> icons on this page.
>
> Secondly, I think people often look for documentation of Squeak most of
> which is found at the Swiki. Hosting the download page at the Swiki itself
> means that *everyone* who has ever downloaded Squeak has seen the Swiki at
> least once. That's what the first sentence in the above is for - so people
> know they are now at the right place. In addition, using a Swiki means we
> can much more easily change and update things. When a new version gets out
> we just change it and then, as the latest platform bundles come in, update
> the information appropriately. The download area at the Swiki also means we
> have a more level playing ground for alternative ports (you may see that one
> entry lists MobVM which is otherwise impossible to find).
>
> About the contents of the download table:
> * "full" means a bundle that absolutely includes everything you need to run
> Squeak. As we don't provide this for all packages we may have some missing
> entries. However, it's a Swiki so it's simple for people to make one up on
> their own and we just link it.
> * "image" means image+changes+sources for the listed "stable" version of
> that platform. Nothing is more bothering than to see that a BeOS port exist
> but not to know what one needs to download.
> * "stable VM" means the latest stable VM known to run well for the listed
> stable version of Squeak. Therefore, "image" + "stable VM" is everything you
> need if you haven't a full package available
> * "VM source code" explicitly links to the source code for the VM in
> question. Many people find it extremely hard to find the sources for VMs so
> here we can point them directly towards it.
>
> In addition, we have an "info" link which allows us to link to specific
> places for some VM/port. This allows us to decouple the primary download
> place from information such as port maintainer, release notes, specific bits
> about the platform. All of this is useful information but it should be
> hosted elsewhere.
>
> Based on the above download page, I figure that a new Squeak release process
> (exemplified with 3.6) would consist of the following steps:
> a) we make a copy of the current download page and name it appropriately
> (such as "DownloadsForSqueak3.5") - this is now a "previous version"
> b) change the latest stable version and link to the previous version. In
> effect this means you can always wander backwards through all the old
> versions and get - for example - exactly the "right" VM for Squeak 3.2 or
> so. Therefore we only need to link to some previous versions here.
> c) Update the links for the "primary" full/image packages which Bruce
> handles.
>
> >From here on, we can leave everything as is. If we have some platform
> maintainer who wants to update his or her port, she can simply update "her
> row" in the table. So it's a very simple, straightforward and obvious
> process which means that if people are interested they have a single place
> where they can download about everything that's interesting about Squeak.
>
> What do you think?
>
> Cheers,
> - Andreas
>
> _______________________________________________
> Squeakfoundation mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation
From [email protected] Fri Jun 20 05:55:59 2003
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Delivered-To: [email protected]
Received: (qmail 11446 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2003 05:55:58 -0000
Received: from mxout4.netvision.net.il (194.90.9.27)
by mail.theinternetone.net with SMTP; 20 Jun 2003 05:55:58 -0000
Received: from aSqueakSystem ([80.178.96.131]) by mxout4.netvision.net.il
(iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 HotFix 1.14 (built Mar 18 2003))
with SMTPA id <[email protected]> for
[email protected]; Fri,
20 Jun 2003 08:58:30 +0300 (IDT)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 08:50:21 +0200
From: Daniel Vainsencher <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Squeakfoundation]KCP & 3.6
To: Discussing the Squeak Foundation
<[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected]
Message-id: <[email protected]>
X-Mailer: Celeste 2.0.5174
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
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://lists.squeakfoundation.org/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: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 05:55:59 -0000
I disagree with the current calls to delay the release. If we wait for
everyone to get whatever matters to them in, we might never make a
release again :-) I don't see anything wrong with stuff waiting for 3.7
- DecPools included.
I know a few of us feel "in the middle of" various projects, but I think
the release process has value too - it reminds us to clean the table
every so often. I think between the KCP deprecations and the network
rewrite, we've had enough change that it will do us good to focus on
stability before we keep moving ahead.
More generally - if we think about the process as a whole, not just the
particular point in time were in, the only right kinds of reasons to
delay the move to beta are "it doesn't meet our functionality goals". A
more specific example is "without this new function, all of this other
stuff we inserted makes no sense AND it is hard to remove that stuff".
Only right kind of reason to avoid moving from beta to gamma is "this
version doesn't meet our stability goals". Which I think should be "this
version should be stabler than the previous one".
So a one week delay of beta to insert parts of KCP that relate to what's
already in makes a little sense. Delaying by a month just to get more
stuff in now that the harvesting process is livelier, seems unjustified
to me - we can get that after the version fork.
Speaking of which - at which stage do we create the 3.7 update stream?
last time we did it on entry to beta, IIRC, yet some might say entry to
gamma is more reasonable. What do we think?
Daniel
Tim Rowledge <[email protected]> wrote:
> I don't think we're anywhere near ready for beta right now; just for an
> example in my area there is the DeclarativePools stuff to decide on.
>
> tim
> --
> Tim Rowledge, [email protected], http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim
> Strange OpCodes: KFP: Kindle Fire in Printer
> _______________________________________________
> Squeakfoundation mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation
From [email protected] Fri Jun 20 11:07:55 2003
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Delivered-To: [email protected]
Received: (qmail 3000 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2003 11:07:55 -0000
Received: from ns.bluefish.se (HELO leia.bluefish.se) (213.212.22.234)
by mail.theinternetone.net with SMTP; 20 Jun 2003 11:07:55 -0000
Received: from www-data by leia.bluefish.se with local (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
id 19TJkH-0001fm-00
for <[email protected]>;
Fri, 20 Jun 2003 13:07:53 +0200
To: Discussing the Squeak Foundation
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Squeakfoundation]KCP & 3.6
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 13:07:53 +0200 (CEST)
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=F6ran_Hultgren?= <[email protected]>
References: <[email protected]>
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
User-Agent: IMP/PHP IMAP webmail program 2.2.6
X-Originating-IP: 212.105.13.74
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://lists.squeakfoundation.org/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: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 11:07:55 -0000
Hi all!
I am a bit swamped right now - but I wanted to throw in at least one post on
this subject. All in all I agree with Daniel :-). Just wanted to remind people
that we wanted SM1.1 in 3.6. Since SM is a package this may or may not affect
the decision to go to beta - but anyway SM1.1 is still not fully implemented.
Both Brian and I have been locked up with other things the last week or two. But
we have made some good progress. I intend to put some time on it the coming week
- perhaps enough to get something running for people to look at.
regards, Göran
PS. Since people have been discussing the UI of the Package Loader and friends -
with SM1.1 they need to be able to show/handle releases of packages and not just
packages. And a bunch of other things too. ;-)
Göran Hultgren, [email protected]
GSM: +46 70 3933950, http://www.bluefish.se
\"Department of Redundancy department.\" -- ThinkGeek
From [email protected] Fri Jun 20 12:20:07 2003
Return-Path: <[email protected]>
Delivered-To: [email protected]
Received: (qmail 17633 invoked from network); 20 Jun 2003 12:20:07 -0000
Received: from mailhub01-skge0.unibe.ch (HELO mailhub01.unibe.ch)
(130.92.9.52)
by mail.theinternetone.net with SMTP; 20 Jun 2003 12:20:07 -0000
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by mailhub01.unibe.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3CD8225BA50
for <[email protected]>;
Fri, 20 Jun 2003 14:20:07 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from mailhub01.unibe.ch ([127.0.0.1])
by localhost (mailhub01 [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP
id 16962-01-56 for <[email protected]>;
Fri, 20 Jun 2003 14:20:06 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from asterix.unibe.ch (asterix.unibe.ch [130.92.64.4])
by mailhub01.unibe.ch (Postfix) with ESMTP id 28EB325BA52
for <[email protected]>;
Fri, 20 Jun 2003 14:20:06 +0200 (MEST)
Received: from iam.unibe.ch (asterix [130.92.64.4])
by asterix.unibe.ch (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id h5KCK2K26686
for <[email protected]>;
Fri, 20 Jun 2003 14:20:04 +0200 (MET DST)
Date: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 12:36:58 +0200
Subject: Re: [Squeakfoundation]KCP & 3.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v552)
From: Stephane Ducasse <[email protected]>
To: Discussing the Squeak Foundation
<[email protected]>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
In-Reply-To: <[email protected]>
Message-Id: <[email protected]>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.552)
X-Virus-checked: by University of Berne
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://lists.squeakfoundation.org/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: Fri, 20 Jun 2003 12:20:08 -0000
On Thursday, June 19, 2003, at 02:38 PM, Daniel Vainsencher wrote:
> Doug Way <[email protected]> wrote:
>> On the subject of KCP, if we want to get another batch of KCP updates
>> in
>> before 3.6 goes beta, we should probably do that soon. I'll leave it
>> to
>> Daniel to coordinate harvesting/approving that. (Realistically I
>> think
>> we need to have one harvester in charge of these types of cleanup
>> projects... it would be difficult to rely on the regular harvesting
>> process to individually approve a bunch of cumulatively dependent
>> changesets.)
> I've waited before doing the next batch of approvals, in case someone
> wants to help with reviewing the stuff. So far we don't have any
> volunteers, so I'll see if I can get in a few hours of review+approvals
> sometime next week. Considering the feature-deprecating nature of KCP,
> I'd prefer to not continue bring in that stuff in beta.
Why daniel, if you want to get the image clean there is no way that we
will avoid
to deprecate stuff. The sooner we do it the sonner we will fix
everything.
So I do not understand your point.
>
>> Speaking of 3.6beta, technically the planned date for this is in two
>> days, this Friday the 20th. But I think we could be a little flexible
>> with that date, since we're now finally moving with harvesting
>> stuff...
>> definitely move to beta sometime next week though. We should still
>> keep
>> our final date of August 1st, though, unless we agree now to postpone
>> it
>> for some reason.
>
> I would be partial to postponing beta start by up to one week, without
> postponing release (yet). I'm not big on playing around with schedules,
> but since we're still experimenting in this area, so it doesn't seem
> like a big deal.
>
> As to beta itself, I'd say that during it what we should focus on doing
> is that everyone that maintains/uses packages and can afford to help,
> should move to using it (if up to now they were using 3.5), and then we
> harvest only not-too-risky bug fixes. Another things that I would like
> to see happen is that we get a lot of
> A. Tests submitted to Marcus' test package.
> B. Fixes to everything that's red in Marcus' test package.
>
> Having the test package green at every release sounds like good
> practice
> to me.
>
> Daniel
> _______________________________________________
> Squeakfoundation mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/listinfo/squeakfoundation
>