On Jan 8, 2011, at 4:42 PM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: > Stef, > > I'm not sure I follow. I think we agree that loading all configurations and > running tests is good.
I meant that the configurations do not have to be loaded in the image. > I understand why the web image went away when it took somebody's time time > build it, but the Hudson server can do that work now. It seems reasonable to > leave a range of targets that might be of value to people. yes now somebody should maintain the configuration and fix conflict. > There could be a few likely useful targets (minimal, dev, web) and then one > with absolutely everything that is mostly for testing. But if somebody wants > to use that, why not leave it on the server so they can get it? because who maintains if there is a bug due to a conflict. Building the seaside image took lukas time and effort. I'm learned that things do not magically work. So if somebody stands up and say ok I'm responsible for the imageXZK why not and we can set up hudson to build it. Now we (the core minimal team) should spend time on getting the infrastructure right on tracks because this is an enabler of the future. > > Bill > > > > ________________________________________ > From: pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr > [pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr] On Behalf Of Stéphane Ducasse > [stephane.duca...@inria.fr] > Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2011 10:30 AM > To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr > Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] About preloaded packages > >> It would also like a PharoBloat image built by Hudson with all >> ConfigurationOfXXX which are supposed to work on all operating systems. > > Not loaded :) > Just published in the right squeaksource repository and validated (run, tests > run and results shown....) via an hudson server. >
