[Chip == [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 6 Apr 2005 18:24:49 -0400]
Chip> * On the third to last day of the month, someone (me, by
Chip> default) will create a release document...
Chip> * Starting on the first of the month, there will be a code
Chip> freeze...
Is it on?
Chip> No changes sho
> It was on parrotcode or dev.perl.org at some point.
> Maybe that can be reused?
Our tinderbox.perl.org volunteer is working on it. We've been nudging
him, and he's got some cool stuff going on.
According to Brent 'Dax' Royal-Gordon:
> From what I recall, we're planning a bootstrapping system. The
> configuration/build system will be written in a Parrot language
> (possibly, but not necessarily, Perl 6), with PBC files included in
> the distribution. To bootstrap, we'll have platform-spe
Chip Salzenberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> According to MrJoltCola:
> > I can tell you now Sparc / GCC is broken for most due to our broken
> > Configure. Our config pulls out the params that were used to build
> > Perl with, and this is invalid because most Sparc folks are running
> > a pre-bui
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
Is there already a configuration roadmap, something for me to start with
as I look to What Should Be?
I'm not aware of one. There's been lots of discussion over the years both
on the perl6-internals list and on the now-defunct perl6-build list, but
but
At 12:32 PM 4/7/2005, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
According to Peter Sinnott:
> I set up a tinder server a couple of weeks ago.
> Not sure if anyone else looks at it.
>
> http://unlinked.vm.bytemark.co.uk/tinder//parrot/status.html
I understand that tinderbox is an automated system for test builds
with
According to Peter Sinnott:
> I set up a tinder server a couple of weeks ago.
> Not sure if anyone else looks at it.
>
> http://unlinked.vm.bytemark.co.uk/tinder//parrot/status.html
I understand that tinderbox is an automated system for test builds
with result collation. Is there any need for a
On Thu, Apr 07, 2005 at 10:59:41AM -0400, Jeff Horwitz wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, MrJoltCola wrote:
>
> > Where did Tinderbox go anyway? I don't mind running a tinderclient at all.
>
> i ran a tinderclient on my ultra 60 for a while before the tinderbox went
> away. i think i was the only sola
On Thu, 7 Apr 2005, MrJoltCola wrote:
> Where did Tinderbox go anyway? I don't mind running a tinderclient at all.
i ran a tinderclient on my ultra 60 for a while before the tinderbox went
away. i think i was the only solaris box out there, and i'd be more than
happy to run it again when and if
According to MrJoltCola:
> I can tell you now Sparc / GCC is broken for most due to our broken
> Configure. Our config pulls out the params that were used to build
> Perl with, and this is invalid because most Sparc folks are running
> a pre-built Perl and GCC binary that was built on a distributo
At 03:21 AM 4/7/2005, Leopold Toetsch wrote:
MrJoltCola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 06:24 PM 4/6/2005, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
>> * What platforms are required for release? I'd guess that we'd get
>> almost of all of our developers (and users, for that matter) with:
>>
>> darwin
>>
On Wed, 6 Apr 2005, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
According to MrJoltCola:
At 06:24 PM 4/6/2005, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
* What platforms are required for release? I'd guess that we'd get
almost of all of our developers (and users, for that matter) with:
darwin
linux-x86-gcc3.*
win32-ms
On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 22:28 -0400, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> According to MrJoltCola:
> > At 06:24 PM 4/6/2005, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> > > * What platforms are required for release? I'd guess that we'd get
> > >almost of all of our developers (and users, for that matter) with:
> > >
> > >
MrJoltCola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> At 06:24 PM 4/6/2005, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
>> * What platforms are required for release? I'd guess that we'd get
>> almost of all of our developers (and users, for that matter) with:
>>
>> darwin
>> linux-x86-gcc3.*
>> win32-ms-cl
At 10:28 PM 4/6/2005, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
According to MrJoltCola:
> At 06:24 PM 4/6/2005, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> > * What platforms are required for release? I'd guess that we'd get
> >almost of all of our developers (and users, for that matter) with:
> >
> > darwin
> > linux-
T least one FC3 x86_64
Jay Scherrer
On Wed, 2005-04-06 at 22:28 -0400, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> According to MrJoltCola:
> > At 06:24 PM 4/6/2005, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> > > * What platforms are required for release? I'd guess that we'd get
> > >almost of all of our developers (and users, f
According to MrJoltCola:
> At 06:24 PM 4/6/2005, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> > * What platforms are required for release? I'd guess that we'd get
> >almost of all of our developers (and users, for that matter) with:
> >
> > darwin
> > linux-x86-gcc3.*
> > win32-ms-cl
>
> You shou
At 06:24 PM 4/6/2005, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
* What platforms are required for release? I'd guess that we'd get
almost of all of our developers (and users, for that matter) with:
darwin
linux-x86-gcc3.*
win32-ms-cl
You should round that out with 64-bit Sparc.
-Melvin
Nick Clark brings to my attention that I'm missing a footnote:
According to Chip Salzenberg:
> * What should the standard be for "good enough" in the build? Quite
> a few tests will be expected to fail on all platforms. We don't
> want a standard that's so rigid it would be at home in
I've recently had it suggested that Parrot use a regular release
schedule, which tends to maintain momentum and provide many happy
opportunities for spreading propaganda^Wnews of our progress.
So, wearing my Fearless Leader hat, I announce that from now on we'll
be releasing on a regular schedule.
20 matches
Mail list logo
