On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 5:19 PM, Marcus Denker <[email protected]>wrote:
> > On Apr 4, 2011, at 5:05 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > > > > On Sat, Mar 12, 2011 at 8:19 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> So....here is the list of things I guess are pending: >> >> > > In general, for all pending things adding entries in the bug tracker is the > only way ti make sure they are not forgotten. > > 1) "Release" all configurations included in Pharo (this is, >> ConfigurationOfPharo and all it dependencies). I mean, we should NOT use or >> depend on #development versions. >> > > so...can someone check this is done? GUillermo and me did it once...but it > seems a lot of stuff was updated once again > > > I just gave up and took the image yesterday. Like you did for 1.1: Just > build it once, don't care that it is repeatable. > Sorry, I didn't understand. The Pharo 1.1 was repeatable (in the same core) since all the Metacello versions were frozen. > > > >> 2) Update the one click image to use latest cog images and "pharo prepared >> vms". There are some issues regarding this... >> > > Marcus, which is the status of this one ? > > > I updated the one-click image with the last cog VM. > > For the one-click, it is identical to 1.1 with the only change that I put > the windows VM I got from Torsten. > But 1.1 was not-Cog (Cog 1.1.1 was cog). So...we are shipping the Pharo One Click 1.2 with the Interpreter VM instead of Cog ? or did you mean 1.1.1 ? if so, it would be good to update to latest Cog. The cog version used for 1.1.1 had several problems (I think the run:with:in: crashes the image -> TestCoverage) > > >> 3) Write down all the things/summary done in Pharo 1.2 >> > > consider as done in nobody else comes with something better, > > >> 5) Update SystemVersion current -->> Pharo1.2rc2 of 27 January 2011 >> update 12340 >> > > > SystemVersion current ->> Pharo1.2.1 of 2 April 2011 update 12345 > > so..it is ok, isn't it ? can we forget this item ? > > >> 6) Condense sources? condense changes? #cleanUpForRelease >> >> > Marcus, is that necessary ? > > DEVImageCreator >> cleanUps > > ScriptLoader new cleanUpForRelease. > "In Pharo 1.1 condenseChanges is VERY slow because of the new method > trailers. So condensingChanges each time even when it is not needed is not a > good idea anymore. So in case a condenseChanges is needed it should be done > explicitly. > Smalltalk condenseChanges." > Smalltalk garbageCollect. > > I did that and I put that comment. Now that they are faster and that we > have Hudson, should I put back the Smalltalk condenseChanges ? is there > anything else needed? do we need a condenseSources ? > > > > CondenseChange and CondenseSource is broken right now. > > Ok, we can live withoput that :) > Marcus > > > -- > Marcus Denker -- http://www.marcusdenker.de > INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD. > > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
