Guido, 

I've just released Metacello Preview 1.0.0-beta.32.8[1] that includes a bugfix 
for your issue. Let me know if you need more information. 

Dale 

[1] 
http://gemstonesoup.wordpress.com/2013/07/17/metacello-preview-1-0-0-beta-32-8-composed/
 

----- Original Message -----

| From: "Guido Chari" <[email protected]>
| To: "Pharo Development List" <[email protected]>
| Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2013 12:42:40 PM
| Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] Metacello doubt

| Ok, i will follow the issue on github. Thanks!

| 2013/7/1 Dale K. Henrichs < [email protected] >

| | Guido,
| 

| | I created a test case and it turns out that there _is_ a bug in the
| | bypass lock logic[1] . I'm going to push out a new version of the
| | Metacello Preview (1.0.0-beta.32.8) in the next day or so and the
| | bugfix for Issue #174 will _not_ be included in that release ...
| 

| | Dale
| 

| | [1] https://github.com/dalehenrich/metacello-work/issues/174
| 

| | | From: "Guido Chari" < [email protected] >
| | 
| 
| | | To: "Pharo Development List" < [email protected] >
| | 
| 

| | | Sent: Thursday, June 27, 2013 10:23:33 AM
| | 
| 

| | | Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] Metacello doubt
| | 
| 

| | | I'm in.
| | 
| 

| | | 2013/6/26 Dale K. Henrichs < [email protected] >
| | 
| 

| | | | | From: "Guido Chari" < [email protected] >
| | | | 
| | | 
| | 
| 
| | | | | To: "Pharo Development List" < [email protected] >
| | | | 
| | | 
| | 
| 
| | | | | Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 2:49:09 PM
| | | | 
| | | 
| | 
| 

| | | | | Subject: Re: [Pharo-dev] Metacello doubt
| | | | 
| | | 
| | 
| 

| | | | | I understood. Thanks for the answer Dale. The drawback in
| | | | | this
| | | | | case
| | | | | is to specify a particular dependency to AsmJit in my
| | | | | configuration.
| | | | | Also, perhaps is the right way since i realized i have a
| | | | | particular
| | | | | dependency on it.
| | | | 
| | | 
| | 
| 

| | | | | But this discussion makes me thing a little and so i have a
| | | | | new
| | | | | question.
| | | | 
| | | 
| | 
| 

| | | | | Form what I (mis) undestand from Metacello, when asking for a
| | | | | bleedingEdge version it loads only the baseline that
| | | | | specifies
| | | | | packages and then last version of every package specified
| | | | | there.
| | | | 
| | | 
| | 
| 

| | | | | As in the projects referenced on the baseline there is no
| | | | | need
| | | | | for
| | | | | specifying a version, and that's the case of nativeBoost
| | | | | configuration, wouldn't it be interesting to have some
| | | | | behavior
| | | | | (i
| | | | | mean i new method for loading like loadDeepSymbolic:) that
| | | | | not
| | | | | only
| | | | | load the symbolicVersion of the package asked, but also
| | | | | propagate
| | | | | that symbolicVersion (bleedingEdge in this case) to all the
| | | | | dependencies that don't specify a concrete version?
| | | | 
| | | 
| | 
| 

| | | | | Guido.
| | | | 
| | | 
| | 
| 

| | | | Guido,
| | | 
| | 
| 

| | | | With the Metacello Scripting API[1] I've taken a slightly
| | | | different
| | | | tack, but I think that it gets you to the same place.
| | | 
| | 
| 

| | | | I am a big fan of deterministic loads, but I know that from a
| | | | practical point of view developers need to have a certain
| | | | amount
| | | | of
| | | | control over exactly what gets loaded into their DEVELOPMENT
| | | | environments and they need to be able to exert this control
| | | | without
| | | | having to resort to editing configurations to match their
| | | | specific
| | | | requirements.
| | | 
| | 
| 

| | | | I have accomplished this by arranging for a Notification to be
| | | | signalled whenever a project is referenced during a load. The
| | | | developer can use one or more of the onUpgrade:, onDowngrade:
| | | | and
| | | | onConflict: clauses in their load scripts to exert fine control
| | | | over
| | | | what happens on a project by project basis ...
| | | 
| | 
| 

| | | | For your specific use case, I would think that you would want
| | | | to
| | | | use
| | | | the `lock` command[2] and specify that you want to `lock` the
| | | | projects (NativeBoost and AsmJit) to the #bleedingEdge version.
| | | | I
| | | | don't recall if I've got test cases for symbolic versions, but
| | | | if
| | | | you are seriously interested in taking the Scripting API for a
| | | | spin,
| | | | I'd be willing to write some additional tests using the
| | | | #bleedingEdge symbolic version (if not already covered) and
| | | | validate
| | | | this use case...
| | | 
| | 
| 

| | | | I am entering a phase where I will be doing some work on
| | | | getting
| | | | FileTree and Metacello up to snuff for Pharo3.0 so this would
| | | | be
| | | | a
| | | | good time for me to add some test cases in anticipation of
| | | | having
| | | | some interested users ...
| | | 
| | 
| 

| | | | I haven't released the Scripting API, because I need to have
| | | | real
| | | | users with real use cases take the API for a spin and validate
| | | | the
| | | | API. The Scripting API can be loaded into any version of
| | | | Pharo/Squeak/GemStone and I think the Scripting API is (or will
| | | | be)
| | | | available in Pharo3.0.
| | | 
| | 
| 

| | | | I'm looking forward to getting feedback as to how the API
| | | | stands
| | | | up
| | | | to real use ...
| | | 
| | 
| 

| | | | So let me know if you are interested in being another Scripting
| | | | API
| | | | guinea pig:)
| | | 
| | 
| 

| | | | Dale
| | | 
| | 
| 

| | | | [1]
| | | | 
https://github.com/dalehenrich/metacello-work/blob/master/docs/MetacelloUserGuide.md
| | | 
| | 
| 
| | | | [2]
| | | | 
https://github.com/dalehenrich/metacello-work/blob/master/docs/MetacelloUserGuide.md#locking
| | | 
| | 
| 

Reply via email to