Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.clipper.visual-objects > #608 > unrolled thread

Re: Migration VO2.5b3 to 2.8

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.clipper.visual-objects

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: Migration VO2.5b3 to 2.8 "Geoff Schaller" <geoffx@softwarexobjectives.com.au> - 2011-03-29 20:45 +0000
    Re: Migration VO2.5b3 to 2.8 E®!k \\/!$$E® <nospam@nospam.com> - 2011-03-31 08:35 +0200
      Re: Migration VO2.5b3 to 2.8 "Geoff Schaller" <geoffx@softwarexobjectives.com.au> - 2011-03-31 21:43 +0000
        Re: Migration VO2.5b3 to 2.8 E®!k \\/!$$E® <nospam@nospam.com> - 2011-04-01 09:03 +0200
          Re: Migration VO2.5b3 to 2.8 "Geoff Schaller" <geoffx@softwarexobjectives.com.au> - 2011-04-01 23:18 +0000

#608 — Re: Migration VO2.5b3 to 2.8

Sarcastic! Give a guy a break <g>.


Go 2.8 - you must. Despite the initial pain and effort it will be worth 
it. Make sure no errors are excluded and all warnings as errors. You 
won't regret the stability it achieves.

Unfortunately 2.8 itself still has a few annoying bugs but we have been 
promised no more- VO doesn't even have a developer any longer. Not a 
genuine one with experience at any rate. So its all over. 2.8 is the end 
of the line.

Geoff



"George" <george@elfin.ru> wrote in message 
news:45f99912-1567-4a13-848b-768b3f94cbbf@k22g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:

> Hi everybody,
> I've been away from this NG for some years. Nice to see that nothing
> changed: VO is still dying, community is still shrinking, patches
> still not coming, and when they do, bring new bugs. The next company
> still wants to stop development. Geoff is still sarcastic. Guys who
> left VO many years ago are still here. Everithing goes in its usual
> way, and it gives me sense of stability and confidence that VO is
> forever.
> I decided to migate a huge application with megabytes of business
> logic and hundreds of screens from 2.5b3 to something more fast and
> stable. It still crashes sometimes due to 5333 error. Rewriting it in
> C# is not realistic.
> Can anybody please give me an advice, does it make sense to port it to
> 2.8?
>
> George Razutov

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#616

Geoff,

Perhaps you've missed the message Meinhard is now working for Grafx.
He does have knowledge and experience on VO to an extreem level.

Erik




"Geoff Schaller"  wrote in message 
news:4d9244f3$0$88196$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net...

Sarcastic! Give a guy a break <g>.


Go 2.8 - you must. Despite the initial pain and effort it will be worth
it. Make sure no errors are excluded and all warnings as errors. You
won't regret the stability it achieves.

Unfortunately 2.8 itself still has a few annoying bugs but we have been
promised no more- VO doesn't even have a developer any longer. Not a
genuine one with experience at any rate. So its all over. 2.8 is the end
of the line.

Geoff



"George" <george@elfin.ru> wrote in message
news:45f99912-1567-4a13-848b-768b3f94cbbf@k22g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:

> Hi everybody,
> I've been away from this NG for some years. Nice to see that nothing
> changed: VO is still dying, community is still shrinking, patches
> still not coming, and when they do, bring new bugs. The next company
> still wants to stop development. Geoff is still sarcastic. Guys who
> left VO many years ago are still here. Everithing goes in its usual
> way, and it gives me sense of stability and confidence that VO is
> forever.
> I decided to migate a huge application with megabytes of business
> logic and hundreds of screens from 2.5b3 to something more fast and
> stable. It still crashes sometimes due to 5333 error. Rewriting it in
> C# is not realistic.
> Can anybody please give me an advice, does it make sense to port it to
> 2.8?
>
> George Razutov 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#619

Extreme eh? So now Meinhard is a C++ expert in the VO compiler. 
Hmmmm.....

It took Robert several years to get to the point where could 
successfully add new bugs to VO. Are you suggesting that Meinhard can 
come up to speed in just a few weeks?

Geoff



"ER!k \/!$$ER" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message 
news:8villvFpo2U1@mid.individual.net:

> Geoff,
>
> Perhaps you've missed the message Meinhard is now working for Grafx.
> He does have knowledge and experience on VO to an extreem level.
>
> Erik
>
>
>
>
> "Geoff Schaller"  wrote in message
> news:4d9244f3$0$88196$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net...
>
> Sarcastic! Give a guy a break <g>.
>
>
> Go 2.8 - you must. Despite the initial pain and effort it will be worth
> it. Make sure no errors are excluded and all warnings as errors. You
> won't regret the stability it achieves.
>
> Unfortunately 2.8 itself still has a few annoying bugs but we have been
> promised no more- VO doesn't even have a developer any longer. Not a
> genuine one with experience at any rate. So its all over. 2.8 is the end
> of the line.
>
> Geoff
>
>
>
> "George" <george@elfin.ru> wrote in message
> news:45f99912-1567-4a13-848b-768b3f94cbbf@k22g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
>
>
> > Hi everybody,
> > I've been away from this NG for some years. Nice to see that nothing
> > changed: VO is still dying, community is still shrinking, patches
> > still not coming, and when they do, bring new bugs. The next company
> > still wants to stop development. Geoff is still sarcastic. Guys who
> > left VO many years ago are still here. Everithing goes in its usual
> > way, and it gives me sense of stability and confidence that VO is
> > forever.
> > I decided to migate a huge application with megabytes of business
> > logic and hundreds of screens from 2.5b3 to something more fast and
> > stable. It still crashes sometimes due to 5333 error. Rewriting it in
> > C# is not realistic.
> > Can anybody please give me an advice, does it make sense to port it to
> > 2.8?
> >
> > George Razutov

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#621

Geoff,

You might have a point, but VO is a bit more than the compiler only.

Erik





"Geoff Schaller"  wrote in message 
news:4d94f573$0$88196$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net...

Extreme eh? So now Meinhard is a C++ expert in the VO compiler.
Hmmmm.....

It took Robert several years to get to the point where could
successfully add new bugs to VO. Are you suggesting that Meinhard can
come up to speed in just a few weeks?

Geoff



"ER!k \/!$$ER" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:8villvFpo2U1@mid.individual.net:

> Geoff,
>
> Perhaps you've missed the message Meinhard is now working for Grafx.
> He does have knowledge and experience on VO to an extreem level.
>
> Erik
>
>
>
>
> "Geoff Schaller"  wrote in message
> news:4d9244f3$0$88196$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net...
>
> Sarcastic! Give a guy a break <g>.
>
>
> Go 2.8 - you must. Despite the initial pain and effort it will be worth
> it. Make sure no errors are excluded and all warnings as errors. You
> won't regret the stability it achieves.
>
> Unfortunately 2.8 itself still has a few annoying bugs but we have been
> promised no more- VO doesn't even have a developer any longer. Not a
> genuine one with experience at any rate. So its all over. 2.8 is the end
> of the line.
>
> Geoff
>
>
>
> "George" <george@elfin.ru> wrote in message
> news:45f99912-1567-4a13-848b-768b3f94cbbf@k22g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
>
>
> > Hi everybody,
> > I've been away from this NG for some years. Nice to see that nothing
> > changed: VO is still dying, community is still shrinking, patches
> > still not coming, and when they do, bring new bugs. The next company
> > still wants to stop development. Geoff is still sarcastic. Guys who
> > left VO many years ago are still here. Everithing goes in its usual
> > way, and it gives me sense of stability and confidence that VO is
> > forever.
> > I decided to migate a huge application with megabytes of business
> > logic and hundreds of screens from 2.5b3 to something more fast and
> > stable. It still crashes sometimes due to 5333 error. Rewriting it in
> > C# is not realistic.
> > Can anybody please give me an advice, does it make sense to port it to
> > 2.8?
> >
> > George Razutov 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#629

No it isn't - let's look at the components:

IDE, compiler, runtime funcs, RDDs - all C++ stuff
CA-Retch, Cato, etc - 3rd party, nothing we can do
GUI Classes - done to death by me, Sven and others (the names are all in 
the source)

The latter are things we can all delve into and don't require a Robert 
or a Meinhard. In fact, that is how Biran has been playing it. Most of 
the new GUI class fixes (if you can call them new) are notated to Paul 
Piko or Sven Ebert. And a few others. I could ask the silly question of 
why Ginny's serial classes (used very widely) just weren't picked up and 
added to the GUI lib? In fact there are quite a few 3rd party 
enhancements EVERYONE uses (Willie's stuff, my stuff, Joachim's 
stuff)... <sigh>. We lost that battle ages ago. So my point is: Meinhard 
has never contributed to this layer - we did. So we don't gain anything.

No-one really wants CA reporting or DataBrowser so let's forget that.

So the important things left to GrafX to manage on our behalf are all 
the things Meinhard has no hope of coming to grips with for some time. 
Assuming Brian pays him enough. I am assuming lack of financial 
incentive is the main reason Robert left. And I do not hold that against 
Robert. He did what he was paid to do. Very little.

Geoff



"ER!k \/!$$ER" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message 
news:8vlbl6F2t8U1@mid.individual.net:

> Geoff,
>
> You might have a point, but VO is a bit more than the compiler only.
>
> Erik
>
>
>
>
>
> "Geoff Schaller"  wrote in message
> news:4d94f573$0$88196$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net...
>
> Extreme eh? So now Meinhard is a C++ expert in the VO compiler.
> Hmmmm.....
>
> It took Robert several years to get to the point where could
> successfully add new bugs to VO. Are you suggesting that Meinhard can
> come up to speed in just a few weeks?
>
> Geoff
>
>
>
> "ER!k \/!$$ER" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:8villvFpo2U1@mid.individual.net:
>
>
> > Geoff,
> >
> > Perhaps you've missed the message Meinhard is now working for Grafx.
> > He does have knowledge and experience on VO to an extreem level.
> >
> > Erik
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > "Geoff Schaller"  wrote in message
> > news:4d9244f3$0$88196$c30e37c6@exi-reader.telstra.net...
> >
> > Sarcastic! Give a guy a break <g>.
> >
> >
> > Go 2.8 - you must. Despite the initial pain and effort it will be worth
> > it. Make sure no errors are excluded and all warnings as errors. You
> > won't regret the stability it achieves.
> >
> > Unfortunately 2.8 itself still has a few annoying bugs but we have been
> > promised no more- VO doesn't even have a developer any longer. Not a
> > genuine one with experience at any rate. So its all over. 2.8 is the end
> > of the line.
> >
> > Geoff
> >
> >
> >
> > "George" <george@elfin.ru> wrote in message
> > news:45f99912-1567-4a13-848b-768b3f94cbbf@k22g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
> >
> >
>
> > > Hi everybody,
> > > I've been away from this NG for some years. Nice to see that nothing
> > > changed: VO is still dying, community is still shrinking, patches
> > > still not coming, and when they do, bring new bugs. The next company
> > > still wants to stop development. Geoff is still sarcastic. Guys who
> > > left VO many years ago are still here. Everithing goes in its usual
> > > way, and it gives me sense of stability and confidence that VO is
> > > forever.
> > > I decided to migate a huge application with megabytes of business
> > > logic and hundreds of screens from 2.5b3 to something more fast and
> > > stable. It still crashes sometimes due to 5333 error. Rewriting it in
> > > C# is not realistic.
> > > Can anybody please give me an advice, does it make sense to port it to
> > > 2.8?
> > >
> > > George Razutov

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.clipper.visual-objects

csiph-web