[Mono-dev] Class status pages are empty

[APS]

http://go-mono.com/status talks about Mono 3.5, 
it's just to clearify that implements FX 3.5 but 
it means Mono 2.x currently available?

At 12.34 21/01/2009, Kornél Pál wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Microsoft .NET Framework 2.0 Service Pack 2 finally was released as a
>standalone update:
>http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=5B2C0358-915B-4EB5-9B1D-10E506DA9D0F&displaylang=en
>
>As a result the following version should be used for comparison:
>1.1 SP1
>2.0 SP2
>3.5 SP1
>
>Updating to 2.0 SP2 would also render the "but not for detecting if
>there are extra APIs (we will have them, as we are now tracking 3.5)"
>clause obsolete.
>
>Also note that the actual status pages at http://go-mono.com/status are
>empty for me using Internet Explorer but work with Firefox.
>
>Kornél
>
>Atsushi Eno wrote:
> > They are now at http://go-mono.com/status
> >
> > Atsushi Eno
> >
> > Leszek Ciesielski wrote:
> >> On Sun, Sep 21, 2008 at 7:30 PM, Miguel de 
> Icaza <miguel at novell.com> wrote:
> >>> Hello,
> >>>
> >>>> Perhaps some members of the Mono team use 
> gui-compare, but I think end-users
> >>>> / third-party developers appreciate an easy way to consult the API
> >>>> compatibility level of certain types/members.
> >>>>
> >>>> The only painful part of the online class 
> status pages (that I see) is that
> >>>> the masterinfo files are not automatically updated (after changes to
> >>>> mono-api-info). This could be scheduled as part of the win32 buildbot
> >>>> though.
> >>> Well, the masterinfo files are really static.   Every time there is a
> >>> new release, someone goes scavenging for all the files, and runs
> >>> mono-api-info on the given assemblies and then we version the result.
> >>>
> >>> The actual masterinfos that we have are all listed in
> >>> mono-tools/gui-compare/InfoManager.cs.  Just grep for "Uri" there.
> >>>
> >>> So its merely an issue of fixing the build, and running more
> >>> mono-api-diffs and generate more web pages for each of the profiles we
> >>> want to compare.   I think those should be:
> >>>
> >>>        1.1
> >>>        2.0
> >>>        3.5 SP1
> >>>
> >>> On a side note: the generation of the masterinfo files is less that
> >>> stellar.  We have used a mix of the Reflection-based tools, and the
> >>> Cecil tools to extract the information, and they are *slightly*
> >>> different.
> >>>
> >>> In the last batch (done for 3.5SP1) I used the Cecil tools for half the
> >>> assemblies (those that lived under Windows/) and reflection ones for the
> >>> ones that live under "Reference Assemblies" because the Cecil ones
> >>> required an assembly resolver that did not work.
> >>>
> >>> So the result is mixed.
> >>>
> >>>> Does gui-compare use the same "masterinfo" input files (for .NET) as
> >>>> corcompare?
> >>> Yes.
> >>>
> >>>> Gert
> >>>>
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: mono-devel-list-bounces at lists.ximian.com
> >>>> [mailto:mono-devel-list-bounces at lists.ximian.com] On Behalf Of Miguel de
> >>>> Icaza
> >>>> Sent: zondag 21 september 2008 19:32
> >>>> To: Gert Driesen
> >>>> Cc: 'mono-devel-list'
> >>>> Subject: Re: [Mono-dev] Class status pages are empty
> >>>>
> >>>> Hello,
> >>>>
> >>>>> What was the reason for discontinuing the (online) class status pages?
> >>>> We never really discontinued it, at least in my case, I stopped caring.
> >>>>
> >>>> They were just difficult to maintain, and doing quick changes were not
> >>>> reflected quickly (we had to wait a few hours for either the process to
> >>>> run, or setup a local system which was never well documented and was
> >>>> messy).
> >>>>
> >>>> Chris Toshok wrote gui-compare, which was very useful to quickly iterate
> >>>> over an API and have since then barely used the Web UI.  I am not sure
> >>>> if others have done it, but I think some of us just stopped using it.
> >>>>
> >>>> I agree that a web version has a lot of value, and would love to keep it
> >>>> around, but in its current form its painful to deal with.   The other
> >>>> bit that is important to point out is that it has not been upgraded to
> >>>> deal with the various new profiles, that is something that would have to
> >>>> be done as well.
> >>>>
> >> Sorry for resurrecting an old discussion, but a lot of pages contain
> >> links to the Mono Class Status page. Which - if if understood this
> >> discussion - is no longer maintained. Could someone put a warning
> >> there that the page no longer works, and what should be used instead?
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Mono-devel-list mailing list
> >> Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
> >> http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Mono-devel-list mailing list
> > Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
> > http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list
> >
>_______________________________________________
>Mono-devel-list mailing list
>Mono-devel-list at lists.ximian.com
>http://lists.ximian.com/mailman/listinfo/mono-devel-list