regardless ... I did a sanity check on the contents of yesterday's latest.zip and hit a walkback
I then did a sanity check on the latest 3.0 installer and hit a different walkback. At least on Win XP 3.1 that does not feel like Beta but like alpha, in my experience. Unstable. Sanity check for a Smalltalk image open a browser open a workspace flip about in the browser [across packages, classes, instance view, class view, implementors and callers DoIt from workspace [never got here either time ; I would do smthg like a ProfStef or call up a browser ; no set routine as that way lies madness ] AND while doing the above, flip between windows, max /min [ I have been doing this for years ... it takes only a couple of minutes - it is not a step-wise protocol .... that would result in missing things that you wouldn't expect - and it is in NO way exhaustive ... it is just a sanity check ( Do you know what year it is? Who is the President of USA ? What is today's date ? How did you get here ? Do you know why you were [arrested/admitted/removed from the aircraft/booted outa the bar ... ) ] Hunch ONLY : Likely culprit ... each time I also opened for future use (and to have some frames open Metacello browser the 2 help items off the main popup menu (one general; one Tutorials - a new user is likely to do so ) I suspect one of the latter, based on Last Class Changed for that image ... but that will be my hunch for now ... ciao r On 26 February 2014 07:18, Esteban Lorenzano <esteba...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On 26 Feb 2014, at 11:30, Robert Shiplett <grshipl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > "BTW, Nautilus is stable and used daily by the whole community." > > This still rankles ... I have been a Smalltalker since long before Squeak > and have been using Pharo since Seaside first ran on it - if not earlier > than that ... > > I also received from another on the mail list > > "and in fact I cannot reproduce it." > > "And in fact" is such a wicked rhetorical move ... in a game I have lost > all interest in playing now that I am retired. > > > it is not. > it was just saying that I tried your problem and I could not reproduce it. > It was not to been rethorical or anything, just pointing a fact. > I’m interested (and is also my job) on having the best and stable version > of Pharo possible. > I’m so interested that I was at 10min from leaving a my house to take an > 10h fly and I sit to try to reproduce your problem. > So, please… do not misinterpret the contents of the mail. It was an > attempt to have an understanding of the problem, in an effort to help. > An effort, btw, that sometimes is not easy, because we do not have all the > elements to make the diagnostic… > > > It may take me a lot of effort to track these 2 bugs down as far as > "Follow these steps to reproduce" .. but then I am not a CONSORTIUM member > ( I used to pay big bucks for Smalltalk, back in the day ) so may be I am > too far outside the "whole community".... btw. > > > The community is here. In this list. Around the list. > Consortium is for companies willing to contribute with some money support > (and so is the association for individuals), because things cost effort and > effort implies time and time implies money. > We always try to solve the problems of everybody (we, the community, > including yourself), because that’s the best for all… so do not put > yourself outside in a way we never say/act/even think about. > We want to help you. > > > I will spare you my plot's view of the term "stable" and the notion of > stability ... and will be sure I rename key files as I go along ... [ why > are we still having to rename files such as these when able to run multiple > images in the same dir ? ] > > > Your pov about stability can be ok. What is not ok is such amount of > negativity over a simple fact: we has not been able to reproduce your > problem (but you avoid the other obvious fact: we tried to reproduce it. So > we did not ignored you). > > Again, I try to help, as everybody in the community… but such a negative > over-reaction is probably just compared to my own overeacted answer :) > > Esteban > > > > ciao > > > > On 26 February 2014 04:36, Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu> wrote: > >> >> On 26 Feb 2014, at 01:57, Robert Shiplett <grshipl...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> > I am running from that latest.zip tonight and PackageTreeNautilusUI >> >>update is getting a walkback messageNoUnderstood for >> > receiver of >>protocolsFor: is nil >> > >> > I simply flipped to class view in Announcements and then flipped that >> toggle back. >> > >> > Does this need to be reported, or is Nautilus still known to be >> unstable ? >> >> I can't reproduce this either, please be more specific. >> >> BTW, Nautilus is stable and used daily by the whole community. Of course, >> it is a complex piece of code with lots of UI and system interactions, so >> issues are always possible. >> >> Sven >> >> >> >> > >
