Please do not promote Nautilus or Glamour here. I'm using Pharo 1.3 (without plans to migrate to Pharo 1.4 or 2.0). It seems to be many version of OmniBrowser out there. Which one is the most tested (in the sense of coverage) or just buggy-free?
http://www.squeaksource.com/PharoOB
http://source.lukas-renggli.ch/ob21
http://source.lukas-renggli.ch/omnibrowser
http://source.wiresong.ca/ob/
...and probably more
I have some questions for it:
Does it work with Shout correctly?
Can I load it without the AST and Refactoring Engine?
Can I load it without Morphic?
It is compatible with any version of Squeak?
It is loadable in Cuis?
Thanks
Omnibrowser is pre-installed in Pharo 1.3.
If you're talking about installing it in 1.3 core, use:
Gofer new
squeaksource: 'MetacelloRepository';
package: 'ConfigurationOfOmniBrowser';
load.
((Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfOmniBrowser) project perform: #version: with: '1.3') load: #( Dev ).
As to your other questions...
Does it work with Shout correctly? Yes.
Can I load it without the AST and Refactoring Engine? Yes. Load the #Core group instead of #Dev.
Can I load it without Morphic? No.
It is compatible with any version of Squeak? Yes. You can load it into Squeak 4.2 and 4.3 with:
Installer ss
project: 'MetacelloRepository';
install: #ConfigurationOfOmniBrowser.
((Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfOmniBrowser) project perform: #stableVersion) load: #( Dev ).
Although there seem to be some problems with it. For instance, refactorings didn't seem to take, and I had to change a few #createCompletionController methods, as errors came up, to:
createCompletionController
^ OController model: self
It is loadable in Cuis? Highly doubtful.
The repository http://source.wiresong.ca/ob/ is the official OmniBrowser repository for Squeak (using Tool-Builder). The repository http://source.lukas-renggli.ch/omnibrowser is the official OmniBrowser repository for Pharo (using Polymorph). In both repositories the core packages are identical and mirrored regularly.
The repository http://source.lukas-renggli.ch/ob21 is outdated, it stems from an experiment that I started many years ago. I removed the repository for now to avoid further confusion. All other repositories (as well as the various Metacello configurations) are based on outdated and forked code. The code you get there lacks many improvements and misses important fixes that had been implemented a long time ago.
For Pharo 1.3, as Philippe points out, you have to merely file-in https://github.com/renggli/builder/blob/master/scripts/omnibrowser.st to get a stable installation. Shout, eCompletion, the Refactoring Engine, and various other extensions are optional. Just remove the parts you don't need from the script. Technically Morphic is not needed either, but then you don't get a default user-interface. There are several other interfaces like OB-Web and OB-Mars that you could load, but I don't know how well they currently work.
The same file-in also works in Squeak. You just have to replace the following packages:
Refactoring-Pharo-Platform with Refactoring-Squeak-Platform (if you want the refactoring engine)
OB-Pharo-Platform with OB-Squeak-Platform
OB-Polymorph with OB-ToolBuilder
Shout is preinstalled in Squeak and not needed
eCompletion does not work in Squeak (as far as I know)
I don't think OmniBrowser works in Cuis. It could be made to work by providing the necessary platform and UI packages. OmniBrowser is unlikely to ever be supported in Pharo 1.4 or Pharo 2.0, because central parts of the reflective system (such as MethodReference and SystemNavigation) changed drastically.
I use the one from http://source.lukas-renggli.ch/omnibrowser because I know where Lukas lives ;-) Lukas has been maintaining it for several years now and I've never had any issues. Having that said it only really works in Pharo 1.3.
Does it work with Shout correctly? Yes
Can I load it without the AST and Refactoring Engine? Yes
Can I load it without Morphic? No
It is compatible with any version of Squeak? No, only Pharo 1.3
It is loadable in Cuis? No, only Pharo 1.3
I use the load script from
https://github.com/renggli/builder/blob/master/scripts/omnibrowser.st unfortunately there is no Metacello configuration.
Related
I want to know what is the difference between installing HortonWorks HDP vs installing the components directly from Apache projects? One thing I can think of is that Horton works probably has the packages aligned so that the version of each component is compatible with that of the others within the suite, while getting them directly from Apache projects, I may have to handle version compatibility myself. Is that correct? Is there any other difference involved ignoring the support subscription aspect of it.
Thanks.
There are a lot of differences between "roll your own" and using a distribution. Some of the most obvious include:
All of the various components and versions have been tested and built to work together - incompatibility between versions (e.g. Hive, Hadoop, Spark, etc.) can be a painful problem to sort through on your own
Most distribution providers, including Hortonworks, will bring patches in from unstable releases into stable releases, so even for the "same" version (e.g. Hive 1.2.1) you're getting a better release than vanilla - these can include both bug fixes and "safe" feature changes
Most distribution providers, including Hortonworks, provide some flavor of centralized platform management. I'm a big fan of Ambari (the one that comes with HDP), for example - it makes configuration and monitoring significantly easier than coordinating a vanilla install
I would strongly recommend against trying to deploy vanilla, unless it's just for learning and playing. HDP community edition is free (both definitions) and a major improvement over doing it yourself. My last deployment of HDP was entirely based on the community edition.
Firstly, I saw some topics about these two but weren't my answer.
I'm looking for a good FPC(Free Pascal Compiler) IDE on GNU/Linux.
There are some IDE's like Lazarus and CodeTyphon. I need suggestion to choose one of those.
I've tried Lazarus once but all windows was separated. It looks messy and not interesting.
I would like to know what are the distinguishes between these two ?
I would like to know advantages / disadvantages each of those. Thank you
CodeTyphon is a distro of Lazarus, like Ubuntu and Debian are distros of Linux.
CodeTyphon comes with a large package of components and plugins, that otherwise you would have to google and download and install.
CodeTyphon have their own idea what are stable versions and what are not stable yet for both of FPC (compiler) and Lazarus(IDE). Whether their assessment is better or worse than upstream's Lazarus Team's, I don't know.
What about one-single-window plugin, it is work-in-progress and it doesn't seems to me it is ready for production use, no matter would you get it as part of CT or download and add it to vanilla Lazarus. However maybe it better works on Linux than on Windows, I don't know.
There were however issues with code legality in CT grande bundle. It is widely believed that Orca (if I remember the name) violates copyrights of glScene/vgScene, which also happened in early Delphi FMX releases but was fixed by EMBA later. There also were disputes in FPC forums/wiki about CodeTyphon pirating some open-source components. See answer by Peter Dunne below.
Your question is akin to asking the difference between Linux and Ubuntu. Lazarus is an IDE/component library, based on FreePascal (FPC). And CodeTyphon is a distribution of Lazarus and FPC. So CodeTyphon is just one way to install a functioning installation of Lazarus.
Lazarus uses the same floating window design as older versions of Delphi. Installing from CodeTyphon won't change that.
Myself and several friends highlighted several licensing issues with codetyphon
most of which could have been corrected by sourcing the included files from known good source and ensuring the correct license headers were included
PirateLogic refused to correct the issues which means they are using code in direct violation of the original license terms
The fact its open source code does not change the fact they are pirating the code by not including the correct license even after the issue was highlighted
I also found several instances of copyright code included which appears to be proprietary and not FOSS at all
They also changed the path & file names on some libraries so that source is no longer compatible with standard lazarus/component installs
This in my view is totally illogical
These 2 factors heavily undermine what was potentially the best FPC/Lazarus distro
Hardly professional
Lazarus can be a daunting installation process due to it's nature as a cross compiling environment. You don't just download an installer and click ok. A typical "installation" is actually a bootstrap FPC compiler doing a three-pass compilation of an "install". There are plenty of good installation scripts/methods from the official Lazarus/FPC team and in the community for a . But, understandably, the installation process is a skill in itself.
CodeTyphon is a a different/separate branch of an installer system, which is more of a utility suite/tools/third party code compilation library. If you want the simplest installation experience go with CodeTyphon. It has the nice graphical front end for managing the compiler. You can conveniently do the fancy stuff like build "cross-compilers" for almost every "target" operating system out there. It also is jam packed with hundreds of the best components/libraries pre-installed. It is a very actively maintained project and very professional. A whole lot of work is done for you.
Even if you want to be learn the low level compiler capabilities, CodeTyphon is a good place to start. It is written in FCP/Lazarus and is open source. Simply study it as "working demo app" and the other info on the compiler details. If you crash it, at least you don't have to learn to climb the hill. You get to get to start from the top and lose control on the way down. Start from scratch (and a three hour reinstallation) Hahaha
Lazarus also has a package "AnchorDock" which allows you to dock all the windows into one. Either install the anchor dock design package after installing Lazarus, or install Lazarus using the script at getlazarus.org which will do it for you.
Using Monticello package manager does not seem to guarantee that, once you added the interesting package(s), the total image is still coherent. Are there any ways to verify that? Are dependencies verified? Are there guidelines in that direction?
I think you're looking for Metacello, a package and configuration manager for Monticello.
You can check out this guide: Managing projects with Metacello, and also there's a page on Google code
While Monticello actually has the possibility to ensure that dependencies are met,
it is limited to the form “this Monticello version depends on exactly these other Monticello versions”. Also, specifying these dependencies is a bit hidden in the Monticello browser and, above all, scarcely used in the community.
As Uko said, Metacello is exactly intended to solve the problem of dependency management in Smalltalk systems. It is not limited to Monticello, conceptually. To my knowledge, most GemStone, Pharo, and Squeak images come with Metacello pre-installed or easily installable.
Have a look at the blog of Metacello’s author, Dale Henrichs, where he gives some introduction to using Metacello.
There is also the Metacello Repository, where most configurations (think software receipts) can be found.
Monticello's responsibility ends with loading individual packages. Coherence comes with either Metacello (see Uko's answer) or with SqueakMap.
SqueakMap stores install scripts that ensure that entire applications get loaded into your image.
Hopefully this is a silly question and there's really a simple solution somewhere out there but...
Has anybody successfully gotten DbLinq to play nicely with Mono 2.4 on Mac OS X 10.5?
I've got my SQLite database ready but for the life of me, I can't find sqlmetal to generate my objects.
I'm guessing I might have to download a previous version of Mono that included sqlmetal, build and install it, and then just use the code generated from that version on Mono 2.4...but I'm hoping to avoid it at all costs.
I'd avoid using DBLinq for production code... many of Linq-To-SQL's features aren't implemented, and walking through the source code shows a low level of maturity... many of the methods are not implemented or marked as "unterminated".
...you've been warned!
Using the pre-compiled binary in this case just doesn't work.
To get a properly generated DbLinq data layer, you have to use the sqlmetal tool included with Mono (but, apparently, not with the pre-compiled binaries for OS X). You have to pull down the Mono trunk (along with all the dependencies) and build Mono from the source.
Once you build and install Mono from source, you should have the sqlmetal tool. Once you generate your code, it's as easy as including the generated *.cs file and importing Mono.Data.Sqlite.
Mono 2.6 will include for the first time a preview of DbLinq with Mono. You can take it out for a spin today if you install DbLinq on your own side-by-side with your current Mono setup.
Are there any differences between the original CruiseControl and the .NET port? I've compared the 2, but can't find any big differences except the language it has been developed in. I want to use either one of them for (automated) testing of web applications, using Selenium and Subversion, perhaps even Groovy but don't know which to choose.
[edit]
After looking at CC and Hudson, I've chosen Hudson for it's simplicity, it already has plugins to run Groovy scripts and Selenium as well
Choose me, choose me! (I work on the original CruiseControl.)
I've never used CC.NET but from what I know I agree that they are pretty comparable. Probably the most important difference is cross-platform vs. Windows only.
Now I wonder how long until someone comes by and says their both crap and you should try Hudson? ;)
(And of course there are lots of other choices...)
CruiseControl.NET (cc.net henceforth) has build queues (http://confluence.public.thoughtworks.org/display/CCNET/Project+Configuration+Block), which allows you to serialize builds that depends on a certain build order. I'm in the process of emulating this behavior in the java version of cruisecontrol but the functionality doesn't map one to one. The reason however, that I'm at all moving from the .net to the java version is that the .net version core dumps with mono (cc.net nightly build and mono nightly build as of two months ago). The fault lies with monos thread handling but voids attempts to get cc.net up and running.
The documentation on this can be tricky to find, if you don't notice the version numbers that the configuration examples/documentation adhere to (confluence.public.thoughtworks.org has the updated configuration documentation whereas ccnet.sourceforge.net has not. I know that the ccnet is most likely a dead site, but if your're not carefully reading the datestamps on every page you're visiting, this may bite you).
Furthermore, the sourcecontrol blocks for cvs and svn in cc.net are more granular and featurerich than their counterpart in the java version, but this has not been a problem in my work. The java version is also easy to extend/modify re: plugin behavior, but you would really just like to see this kind of work going upstream instead of forking.
I'm fairly impressed with both the java version and the fork in .net (modulo mono runtime behavior), but you really do not want to try any of the other forks of cruisecontrol. I've had peripheral experience with hudson, and the features were just not compelling enough to veer me from cruisecontrol. Hudson has a (somewhat coloured) comparison map of Hudson and CruiseControl (java) at http://hudson.gotdns.com/wiki/display/HUDSON/Home
A viable alternative is the python implemented buildbot (http://buildbot.net/trac). It does not have fancy gui dashboards and the setup is somewhat more commandline-bound, but if you're doing distributed builds, it's very easy to set up and get running.
I think for you it will come down to operating system, original can run on nix, and .net version runs on windows.
There are other automated build utilities that can do this as well, such as TeamCity in the windows space, and cruisecontrol.rb in the ruby world.
Also there is a PowerShell based build utility called pSake that can poll subversion and perform tasks.