search

hpi-swa / smalltalkCI

Framework for testing Smalltalk projects with GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, Travis CI, AppVeyor, and others.
MIT License
96 stars 68 forks source link

update to Pharo 10 #538

Closed estebanlm closed 3 years ago

estebanlm commented 3 years ago

We opened Pharo 10 development, which means we need to update smalltalkCI for it :)

fniephaus commented 3 years ago

Has the versioning scheme changed or why is there no minor version number anymore (Pharo 10 vs 10.0)?

estebanlm commented 3 years ago

yep, no minor version because it has no sense (we do not use it anymore)... :) now, I can use it anyway if needed (since eventually could be used), just we want to simplify :P

estebanlm commented 3 years ago

where are this test_get_image_url and test_get_vm_url located? I need to update them... also I am not sure they are good tests, since stable change a lot (once a year, average) ;)

EDIT: found :)

fniephaus commented 3 years ago

also I am not sure they are good tests, since stable change a lot (once a year, average) ;)

Sure, maybe we should remove the tests based on stable/alpha tags. the rest should never change, right?

estebanlm commented 3 years ago

indeed :)

On Jul 21 2021, at 9:41 am, Fabio Niephaus @.***> wrote:

also I am not sure they are good tests, since stable change a lot (once a year, average) ;) Sure, maybe we should remove the tests based on stable/alpha tags. the rest should never change, right?

— You are receiving this because you authored the thread. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub (https://github.com/hpi-swa/smalltalkCI/pull/538#issuecomment-883965825), or unsubscribe (https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAD5MXSMOAHK7GPCK6YMV3DTYZ2ZLANCNFSM5AXJ5F4Q).

fniephaus commented 3 years ago

Unsupported Pharo version 'Pharo64-stable'.

That's indeed a valid bug, you removed Pharo64-stable from the vm map.

estebanlm commented 3 years ago

mmm... need to go now, I'll be back to this the afternoon

estebanlm commented 3 years ago

btw, I was mistaken... they are actually very good tests, I would have miss some targets without them :)

fniephaus commented 3 years ago

btw, I was mistaken... they are actually very good tests, I would have miss some targets without them :)

They are quite annoying to work with if you run them on CI only... but when you run them locally, they are super fast and avoid bugs quite well. :)