1. Euphoria Public Relations

I realize the Euphoria development team is very busy with real life... but how long has it been since a release? October 19th, 2012!? ONE FREAKING YEAR AGO!? Please, can someone post the latest development release?? I know 4.1 isn't finished yet, but it is already pretty stable, and if you don't release a preview, how are the majority of people supposed to know about all the amazing improvements since ONE FREAKING YEAR AGO!? Nightly Builds is not good enough. People have no idea which one of 365+ "nightly builds" is the right one to piece together to try to get a stable environment. I'm still using a release from a year ago, because i don't want to hack euphoria just to get it working. I'm sure other people feel the same way. Would someone please try to put something on the website that is known to be stable so that people will know that Euphoria is not dead? It has so much potential, but we seriously need better presentation of how amazing it is, otherwise, people are never going to bother.

new topic     » topic index » view message » categorize

2. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

I am using:

Euphoria Interpreter v4.0.5 development
Windows, Using Managed Memory
Revision Date: 2013-02-11 02:10:21, Id: 5981:42b209901e89


but no one else seems to have heard of it. It has the replace bug fixed in it.

useless

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

3. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

ryanj said...

I realize the Euphoria development team is very busy with real life... but how long has it been since a release? October 19th, 2012!? ONE FREAKING YEAR AGO!? Please, can someone post the latest development release?? I know 4.1 isn't finished yet, but it is already pretty stable, and if you don't release a preview, how are the majority of people supposed to know about all the amazing improvements since ONE FREAKING YEAR AGO!? Nightly Builds is not good enough. People have no idea which one of 365+ "nightly builds" is the right one to piece together to try to get a stable environment. I'm still using a release from a year ago, because i don't want to hack euphoria just to get it working. I'm sure other people feel the same way. Would someone please try to put something on the website that is known to be stable so that people will know that Euphoria is not dead? It has so much potential, but we seriously need better presentation of how amazing it is, otherwise, people are never going to bother.


I don't think anyone else heard you, Ry. Maybe if you wrote in all caps?

useless

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

4. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

useless_ said...


I don't think anyone else heard you, Ry. Maybe if you wrote in all caps?

useless

ONE FREAKING YEAR AGO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! PLZ UPDATE NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

5. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

@developers
Gents, a suggestion:
Can you choose a recent point in the past, where a major bug has been fixed,
and then release that build as the latest official release,
but specify all subsequent reported/accepted bugs as known issues?
If the documentation of issues is a pain, just say in the release docs to check what issues
are after the chosen date?
Minimum effort IMHO, but gives public visibility to the work you are doing on Euphoria.


Regards,
Alan

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

6. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

ryanj said...

I realize the Euphoria development team is very busy with real life... but how long has it been since a release? October 19th, 2012!? ONE FREAKING YEAR AGO!? Please, can someone post the latest development release?? I know 4.1 isn't finished yet, but it is already pretty stable,

Actually, it more-or-less is finished and ready to ship, as pointed out 5 months ago by mattlewis: http://openeuphoria.org/forum/m/121726.wc

In the interval, jaygade has done a lot of work fixing callbacks in OSX (and other misc OSX work): http://scm.openeuphoria.org/hg/euphoria/rev/4bda3b2a6fa3 , http://scm.openeuphoria.org/hg/euphoria/rev/74222c439548 , http://scm.openeuphoria.org/hg/euphoria/rev/4147657746cb , http://scm.openeuphoria.org/hg/euphoria/rev/40fda2942ba9 , http://scm.openeuphoria.org/hg/euphoria/rev/991791b126ad , http://scm.openeuphoria.org/hg/euphoria/rev/91869ed9ec01 , (and a lot more)...

ryanj said...

Would someone please try to put something on the website that is known to be stable so that people will know that Euphoria is not dead? It has so much potential, but we seriously need better presentation of how amazing it is, otherwise, people are never going to bother.

At this point, we just need someone on the dev team who has enough time to actually build and package the release, and then upload it to sourceforge and update the Downloads page at http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/view/DownloadEuphoria.wc

There's a step-by-step guide on how to package at this wiki page, http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/view/HowToRelease.wc , so even a dev team member who has never performed a release before should be able to do it single handedly.

Also, if you have trouble uploading to sourceforge, I'm sure one of the (very busy) dev team members who has done it before (but lacks the free time to handle the task of doing the complete 4.1.0/4.0.6 release) will be able to scrounge up enough free time to handle that part... or answer any other questions or assist with any other roadblocks that you might hit...

(Who is on the dev team right now that can actually do this big release? Well, ryanj is one of the members...)

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

7. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

jimcbrown said...

At this point, we just need someone on the dev team who has enough time to actually build and package the release, and then upload it to sourceforge and update the Downloads page at http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/view/DownloadEuphoria.wc

There's a step-by-step guide on how to package at this wiki page, http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/view/HowToRelease.wc , so even a dev team member who has never performed a release before should be able to do it single handedly.

Also, if you have trouble uploading to sourceforge, I'm sure one of the (very busy) dev team members who has done it before (but lacks the free time to handle the task of doing the complete 4.1.0/4.0.6 release) will be able to scrounge up enough free time to handle that part... or answer any other questions or assist with any other roadblocks that you might hit...

(Who is on the dev team right now that can actually do this big release? Well, ryanj is one of the members...)

I'm not exactly volunteering but I may be able to help. I am interested in seeing a new release soon.

If I'm reading this right, you're saying that both 4.1.0 and 4.0.6 are ready for release?

-Greg

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

8. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

ghaberek said...

If I'm reading this right, you're saying that both 4.1.0 and 4.0.6 are ready for release?

-Greg

Yes, I am. As far as I know, this is indeed the case.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

9. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

jimcbrown said...

Yes, I am. As far as I know, this is indeed the case.

Are we still building 4.0.x with WATCOM?

Should 4.1.x be built strictly with GCC now? (even on Windows?)

I suppose there should be 32-bit and 64-bit releases of 4.1.x, correct?

-Greg

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

10. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

ghaberek said...
jimcbrown said...

Yes, I am. As far as I know, this is indeed the case.

Are we still building 4.0.x with WATCOM?

Should 4.1.x be built strictly with GCC now? (even on Windows?)

I suppose there should be 32-bit and 64-bit releases of 4.1.x, correct?

I think we should build 4.0.x with Watcom, but IIRC, the policy is to use gcc only for 4.1+. Yes, there will need to be 64-bit releases on Windows and Linux (at least) for 4.1. The debian packaging works for both. I don't know that we've updated the Windows packaging.

We'll need to figure out what to do for OSX and the other BSDs, too.

Matt

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

11. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

mattlewis said...
ghaberek said...
jimcbrown said...

Yes, I am. As far as I know, this is indeed the case.

Are we still building 4.0.x with WATCOM?

Should 4.1.x be built strictly with GCC now? (even on Windows?)

I suppose there should be 32-bit and 64-bit releases of 4.1.x, correct?

I think we should build 4.0.x with Watcom, but IIRC, the policy is to use gcc only for 4.1+. Yes, there will need to be 64-bit releases on Windows and Linux (at least) for 4.1. The debian packaging works for both. I don't know that we've updated the Windows packaging.

We'll need to figure out what to do for OSX and the other BSDs, too.

I'm not sure what we want to do for ARM, since there are a lot of differences that aren't binary compatible among different platforms.

Matt

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

12. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

Where do documentation changes go?

Is the main SCM "euphoria"? What is the purpose of "euphoria_rebase"?

_tom

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

13. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

_tom said...

Is the main SCM "euphoria"?

Yes.

_tom said...

What is the purpose of "euphoria_rebase"?

It was an experiment in something. Anyways, it's no longer useful and should be ignored. I've taken it down.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

14. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

I think that OS X is different enough from the BSDs that they shouldn't be lumped together. I saw then when I was last browsing the code and changing stuff around a few weeks ago. Especially with regards to memory management assumptions.

Unfortunately, my interest has waned again and I haven't made any changes in awhile. I was going to go through and do a major source code cleanup and then I got into doing other stuff.

Still, if something needs to be fixed or tested for OS X prior to release, I can do that. I wouldn't suggest releasing 4.06 for OS X, 4.1+ only.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

15. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

jaygade said...

I think that OS X is different enough from the BSDs that they shouldn't be lumped together. I saw then when I was last browsing the code and changing stuff around a few weeks ago. Especially with regards to memory management assumptions.

I only lumped them together in the sense that I'm not sure what we should be releasing for them. smile

Matt

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

16. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

mattlewis said...

I think we should build 4.0.x with Watcom, but IIRC, the policy is to use gcc only for 4.1+. Yes, there will need to be 64-bit releases on Windows and Linux (at least) for 4.1. The debian packaging works for both. I don't know that we've updated the Windows packaging.

We probably need to update the Windows packaging. I am already familiar with InnoSetup. I also think we need a plain zip release for Windows.

mattlewis said...

We'll need to figure out what to do for OSX and the other BSDs, too.

I only have an older eMac, but I do not have an Intel-based Mac at my disposal. I would love to see a PowerPC release of Euphoria as well, but I'm not sure if the work done for OSX and ARM have done enough to fix all the issues I had trying to build on PowerPC a couple years ago (but I did get it built and mostly-working). Someone else will have to take the reigns on building an OSX release.

mattlewis said...

I'm not sure what we want to do for ARM, since there are a lot of differences that aren't binary compatible among different platforms.

I have an HP TouchPad (ARMv7) and a Raspberry Pi (ARMv6) I can use to test builds for those versions. I make no guarantees on anything else, but those are two popular hacking platforms.


I will see if I can accomplish anything this weekend. I am quite busy but I would like to see a release out soon.

-Greg

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

17. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

wiki said...

Let [...] CODIR be your checkout trunk path of the 4.0 branch or 4.1 (the main trunk).

I just want to clarify a couple things.

Is default the 4.1 source, and is 4.0 the 4.0.6 source?

Should we tag 4.0.6 and 4.1 before or after building?

-Greg

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

18. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

ghaberek said...
wiki said...

Let [...] CODIR be your checkout trunk path of the 4.0 branch or 4.1 (the main trunk).

I just want to clarify a couple things.

Is default the 4.1 source,

Yes.

ghaberek said...

and is 4.0 the 4.0.6 source?

Yes.

ghaberek said...

Should we tag 4.0.6 and 4.1 before or after building?

-Greg

After building. You may need to make minor updates (e.g. bumping up the revision number in various places), which should be committed and pushed before tagging.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

19. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

Thanks Jim.

I also noticed this...

wiki said...

Windows

  • PDF Documentation

    1. euphoria.pdf should go into CODIR/source/build/euphoria.pdf
    2. New binary of eudoc or sources for eudoc (available at http://scm.openeuphoria.org/hg/eudoc)
    3. New binary of creole
    4. TeX live package <--

Is that this TeX Live: TeX Live - TeX Users Group?

The installer wants to pull down 3506 MB to my hard drive. What is this for exactly?

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

20. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

I have just created a new pdf of the documentation.

I use wkhtmltopdf. It converts the Creole html into a pdf without any fuss. It is small download, runs from one file, and uses an ordinay css file for style. Exactly what makes sense for a casual user.

I do not have the time to mess with TexLive and such.

I will be editing the documentation all this week...

_tom

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

21. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

ghaberek said...

I'm not exactly volunteering but I may be able to help. I am interested in seeing a new release soon.

If I'm reading this right, you're saying that both 4.1.0 and 4.0.6 are ready for release?

I have some bandwidth to help with this while it is still early in the semester. What needs to be done at this point to push out a release for 4.1/4.0.6? Or I can just follow the link Jim suggested:

jimcbrown said...

There's a step-by-step guide on how to package at this wiki page, http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/view/HowToRelease.wc , so even a dev team member who has never performed a release before should be able to do it single handedly.

Thanks,
Ira

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

22. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

Jerome said...
ghaberek said...

I'm not exactly volunteering but I may be able to help. I am interested in seeing a new release soon.

If I'm reading this right, you're saying that both 4.1.0 and 4.0.6 are ready for release?

I have some bandwidth to help with this while it is still early in the semester. What needs to be done at this point to push out a release for 4.1/4.0.6? Or I can just follow the link Jim suggested:

jimcbrown said...

There's a step-by-step guide on how to package at this wiki page, http://openeuphoria.org/wiki/view/HowToRelease.wc , so even a dev team member who has never performed a release before should be able to do it single handedly.

There's always something in the chain that breaks between releases. In particular, I know that the build system for 4.1 had some significant changes. I recently started running through some of the deployment type build tasks, and I think that the source-tarball (or whatever they are) processes need some work.

Matt

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

23. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

mattlewis said...

There's always something in the chain that breaks between releases. In particular, I know that the build system for 4.1 had some significant changes. I recently started running through some of the deployment type build tasks, and I think that the source-tarball (or whatever they are) processes need some work.

Ok, I've started going through the process for Windows. It appears that MinGW doesn't produce .lib files for the static libraries. It looks like we can generate them using Microsoft's lib tool (http://www.mingw.org/wiki/MSVC_and_MinGW_DLLs). Do we need to do this?

Also, are we looking to post both 4.0.6 and 4.1.0?

Thanks,
Ira

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

24. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

Jerome said...

It appears that MinGW doesn't produce .lib files for the static libraries. It looks like we can generate them using Microsoft's lib tool (http://www.mingw.org/wiki/MSVC_and_MinGW_DLLs). Do we need to do this?

It produces .a files for the static libraries, which is all that's needed.

IIRC the .lib files are only relevant to (and produced by) OpenWatcom. Which is a 4.0.6 only proposition. 4.1.0 is MinGW-only.

Jerome said...

Also, are we looking to post both 4.0.6 and 4.1.0?

Thanks,
Ira

Yes.

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

25. Re: Euphoria Public Relations

Hallo

There are now beta releases for Euphoria: http://openeuphoria.org/forum/123547.wc?last_id=123564

Maybe they should be mentioned on the OpenEuphoria frontpage...
\

Mean under 'current news'.

Andreas

new topic     » goto parent     » topic index » view message » categorize

Search



Quick Links

User menu

Not signed in.

Misc Menu