EPICS Home

Experimental Physics and Industrial Control System


 
1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  <20182019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024  Index 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  <20182019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
<== Date ==> <== Thread ==>

Subject: Re: AreaDetector repository inconsistent
From: "J. Lewis Muir" <[email protected]>
To: "Mooney, Tim M." <[email protected]>
Cc: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2018 12:42:33 -0600
On 02/07, Mooney, Tim M. wrote:
> I think synApps_x_y.sh is a good idea.  By the way, the reason that
> full synApps releases are not more frequent is not mostly about
> module incompatibilities, but more about our inability to test.  To
> thoroughly test synApps, you have to get it deployed on a beamline.
> We don't have a test beamline, and beamline staff don't want to expose
> their users to questionable software.  They are willing to accept a
> new module version that hasn't been thoroughly tested if there is a
> bug fix or other improvement they need.  But they are not willing to
> risk problems from a module whose new features they don't care about.
> So, as long as we can do single module upgrades, we do them.  This
> works until someone needs a new version of asyn, or seq, or some other
> module that many other modules use.  In that case, it's impractical to
> upgrade single modules, and a new version of synApps is needed.

Hi, Tim!

Thanks for the explanation!  One thing I don't understand, though, is
the part about beamline staff not wanting to expose their users to
questionable software.  Does this seem consistent with my observation
that modules often introduce breaking changes?  I don't think it has to
do with testing because I think the author of the module tests any bug
fix or feature addition before making a new release.  Even if the author
does not have the hardware, I think the author will at least confirm
that the fix or feature works for someone who does have the hardware
before making a new release.  I don't want to belabor the point, but on
the one hand, Mark says he rarely sees breaking changes in modules, and
upgrading is straightforward; but on the other hand, your beamline staff
are worried about exposing their users to questionable software.  What
am I missing?

Regards,

Lewis

Replies:
RE: AreaDetector repository inconsistent Mark Rivers
Re: AreaDetector repository inconsistent Mooney, Tim M.
References:
Re: AreaDetector repository inconsistent Jörn Dreyer
Re: AreaDetector repository inconsistent J. Lewis Muir
RE: AreaDetector repository inconsistent Mark Rivers
Re: AreaDetector repository inconsistent J. Lewis Muir
RE: AreaDetector repository inconsistent Mark Rivers
Re: AreaDetector repository inconsistent J. Lewis Muir
RE: AreaDetector repository inconsistent Mark Rivers
Re: AreaDetector repository inconsistent Pete Jemian
RE: AreaDetector repository inconsistent Mark Rivers
Re: AreaDetector repository inconsistent Mooney, Tim M.

Navigate by Date:
Prev: Re: AreaDetector repository inconsistent J. Lewis Muir
Next: RE: AreaDetector repository inconsistent Mark Rivers
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  <20182019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024 
Navigate by Thread:
Prev: Re: AreaDetector repository inconsistent J. Lewis Muir
Next: RE: AreaDetector repository inconsistent Mark Rivers
Index: 1994  1995  1996  1997  1998  1999  2000  2001  2002  2003  2004  2005  2006  2007  2008  2009  2010  2011  2012  2013  2014  2015  2016  2017  <20182019  2020  2021  2022  2023  2024