On 22 May 2013 17:53, Camillo Bruni <[email protected]> wrote: > I recently spent some time to revise how to write Metacello Configurations. > > Observation: > ============ > - many configurations are quite a mess > - many configurations duplicate code internally > - many configurations have archived development versions > > > For Pharo 3.0 I made a new Configuration template which improves and documents > these observed points in quite some detail. Simply load a new 3.0 image and > create a new configuration from the monticello working copy browser. > > Solution: > ========= > - specify external projects in separate, reusable methods > - only have ONE development version you regularly update > - do not use version numbers for the development version > - only make a version number when you release something stable AKA not > #development > - name the baseline after the first version that introduces it > +1 especially i never understood why development version should have a number. it makes sense , like "a future release number".. but it feels like you should plan what/when you will release before even starting development, which is not always an option.
> > > What do you think? -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko.
