<!DOCTYPE html>
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<p><font size="4">Hi, <br>
</font></p>
<p><font size="4">I think we need some clarification and facing
reality on what can be done.</font></p>
<p><font size="4">Regarding a given Cuis stable release and a given
package, being part of Cuis-Smalltalk organisation or not, I
think about two different aspects of the package:</font></p>
<p><font size="4">1. being compatible, known to work, with the given
Cuis stable release</font></p>
<p><font size="4">2. being maintained for this given Cuis stable
release, its code will evolve within this branch, I guess this
is what you call LTS<br>
</font></p>
<p><font size="4">I have absolutely zero resource to do #2, like
maintaining LTS for Cuis-Smalltalk-UI for example . I have
difficulty to find free time to work on DrGeo or Dynabook.<br>
</font></p>
<p><font size="4">Discussion continue below.<br>
</font></p>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">Le 21/05/2024 à 15:25, Juan Vuletich a
écrit :<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:664CA0CD.8010100@cuis.st"><br>
But I think it is more important to find out which '3rd party'
packages we want (and are able to!) support for a stable release.
Stable releases are meant to be high quality, and users expect
them to work for a long time. They are "LTS" releases (Long Term
Support). We can only include packages we know are in good shape,
and someone has committed to provide support for them as part of
the stable release. We haven't been explicit about this before,
basically because I'll be doing that for the packages in the
Cuis7-0 repository. But I can't do that for packages I don't use
and don't know too much about how they work.
<br>
</blockquote>
<p>Sure you can't and you shouldn't do that. </p>
<p>A maintainers of a package should decide if they want to inform
about #1 and/or volunteer to #2 or none, in this later case
package only evolve with -dev version. </p>
<p>I have no idea how this should be done but a common rule,
description how to do it will be useful to both maintainer and
user of any given package for Cuis. I guess you wan to rely on git
capability.<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:664CA0CD.8010100@cuis.st">
<br>
The next step needs to be to identify those packages. I know,
(this is just an example), that GeographicInformationSystems is
cool. But I haven't used it in quite some time. So unless someone
else has, it doesn't qualify as "well maintained and routinely
used". Obviously, if there is some project actually using it, the
situation is completely different. So we need that list of
packages to work on.
<br>
</blockquote>
<p>Even if not used, such package could be tagged to be known to
work, or may be just load ?<br>
</p>
<p><br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:664CA0CD.8010100@cuis.st">
<br>
I took a not-too-old DrGeo image I had on my machine, and looked
at the packages it has loaded. Hilaire please correct me if this
is wrong or incomplete. Some of these packages are already in the
Cuis7-0 repo. Others are specific to DrGeo. I'm not listing any of
them in what follows.
<br>
<br>
Many packages are in other (3rd party) repos in the Cuis-Smalltalk
organization. So, these are the repos / packages we need to work
on:
<br>
- Numerics / 'LinearAlgebra'
<br>
- SVG / 'SVG'
<br>
- Parsers / 'PetitParser'
<br>
- Erudite /
<br>
'PetitParserBinding'
<br>
'Erudite'
<br>
- Cuis-Smalltalk-UI /
<br>
'UI-Click-Select'
<br>
'UI-Core'
<br>
'UI-Entry'
<br>
'UI-Panel'
<br>
'UI-Preference'
<br>
'UI-Widgets'
<br>
<br>
I'll support Numerics / 'LinearAlgebra' and SVG / 'SVG' under the
repo structure we decide for "3rd party packages for Cuis Stable
Releases". I think they are mature and stable, and haven't had
issues in a long time.
<br>
<br>
So, Hilaire and Ken, do you think that the Cuis-Smalltalk-UI
packages are stable enough to be in a stable release with long
term support? If needed, will you give support for them, not only
for the current Rolling Release, but also for Stable Releases?
These will be different package files, and most likely on separate
repos.
<br>
</blockquote>
<p>As I wrote I can't do #2 on these packages.<br>
</p>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid:664CA0CD.8010100@cuis.st"><br>
I apologize for asking bluntly, but we need to be confident,
before stamping "LongTermSupport'd" on any packages.
<br>
</blockquote>
<p>I think an intermediate status as "known to work" with will be
more realistic.<br>
</p>
Hilaire
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
GNU Dr. Geo
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://gnu.org/s/dr-geo/">http://gnu.org/s/dr-geo/</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://gnu-drgeo.blogspot.com/">http://gnu-drgeo.blogspot.com/</a></pre>
</body>
</html>