VM-Hackers,
what is the status of your SourceForge efforts? I have looked into http://sourceforge.net/projects/squeak/ and it seems to be *empty*.
I have just made an improvement (not tested yet) for Tim's VM2.8 Linux port and would like to have the ability to - see the versions of other platforms, - post it there (after some testing, of course)...
When do you think there is a first source tree? Who is/feels responsible to start with it?
Possibly Tim's port would be a good start...
Greetings,
Stephan
In message 395B821C.96C9E6BF@evolgo.de Stephan Rudlof sr@evolgo.de wrote:
VM-Hackers,
what is the status of your SourceForge efforts? I have looked into http://sourceforge.net/projects/squeak/ and it seems to be *empty*.
Me too. I haven't been able to spend enough time to make snse of how to use itt yet, but then I'm still having trouble making CVS work for me at all. Just doesn't seem to work any way I can realy feel comfortable with.
When do you think there is a first source tree? Who is/feels responsible to start with it?
Possibly Tim's port would be a good start...
Well, it's Ian's really and he has my latest variant of it as of last week. Andreas needs to put the w32 code there, I need to find out how to do anything with it, and the mac code really ought to go there as well. Not to mention the other folks doing the Be, OS/2, dos, amiga, nintendo, palm, EPOC (who, me? And Ed), VMS, MVS, SVM, SMV and Multics ports.
I also have a vague memory of some thread discussing an improved source tree arrangement that would make it easier to keep everything together, but can't find any mail with a definitive statement of the conclusion.
tim
Tim Rowledge wrote:
In message 395B821C.96C9E6BF@evolgo.de Stephan Rudlof sr@evolgo.de wrote:
VM-Hackers,
what is the status of your SourceForge efforts? I have looked into http://sourceforge.net/projects/squeak/ and it seems to be *empty*.
Me too. I haven't been able to spend enough time to make snse of how to use itt yet, but then I'm still having trouble making CVS work for me at all. Just doesn't seem to work any way I can realy feel comfortable with.
When do you think there is a first source tree? Who is/feels responsible to start with it?
Possibly Tim's port would be a good start...
Well, it's Ian's really
Sorry, that's true. But your last version is *working*!
and he has my latest variant of it as of last week. Andreas needs to put the w32 code there, I need to find out how to do anything with it, and the mac code really ought to go there as well. Not to mention the other folks doing the Be, OS/2, dos, amiga, nintendo, palm, EPOC (who, me? And Ed), VMS, MVS, SVM, SMV and Multics ports.
But many parts should be platform independent and should be putted there ASAP IMHO!
I also have a vague memory of some thread discussing an improved source tree arrangement that would make it easier to keep everything together, but can't find any mail with a definitive statement of the conclusion.
What about:
Stephan Rudlof wrote:
Bert Freudenberg wrote:
Yep. Andreas Raab suggested the following:
/VM -- generic stuff /Unix -- Unix stuff /Mac -- Mac stuff /Win32 -- Windows stuff /Acorn -- Acorn stuff /BeOS -- BeOS stuff(though I'd prefer Common over VM)
What about /Generic -- generic stuff as for the other items?
With /Generic/VM as subdir or /VM -- VM stuff as additional root.
Stephan
as a first start. Then there is some work to get a working dir structure with changed Makefiles to reflect it, to be comfortable with it.
BTW: Do you need to be an admin to change the directory structure at SourceForge (OK, I could read TFM...)?
Stephan
tim
-- Tim Rowledge, tim@sumeru.stanford.edu, http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim Useful Latin Phrases:- Die dulci fruere =Have a nice day
On Fri, 30 Jun 2000, Stephan Rudlof wrote:
BTW: Do you need to be an admin to change the directory structure at SourceForge (OK, I could read TFM...)?
No. But: It's strongly recommended *not* to change the directory structure of a CVS tree, not rename files etc. It's possible, but it breaks the versioning. So we need to get the structure right from the beginning (which might be the reason nobody started yet).
-- Bert
Bert Freudenberg wrote:
No. But: It's strongly recommended *not* to change the directory structure of a CVS tree, not rename files etc. It's possible, but it breaks the versioning. So we need to get the structure right from the beginning
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Wow, so the creators obviously didn't know how software development works. I've always been impressed by solutions that require you to know what the <structure of the> final solution will be like before you start working on it.
This is probably the best thing about Smalltalk--the development environment really 'gets it' w r t how the development process works in reality.
Henrik
squeak-dev@lists.squeakfoundation.org
-
Bert Freudenberg -
Henrik Gedenryd -
Stephan Rudlof -
Tim Rowledge