well… after sending this mail I stayed thinking and I think something like this is precisely what I have to do :) so I will do an important change to zeroconf to ensure newer versions do not screw with older ones.
cheers, Esteban > On 23 Mar 2015, at 09:06, Esteban Lorenzano <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On 22 Mar 2015, at 22:56, Dale Henrichs <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Damien, >> >> I'm using zeroconf for Pharo 1.2, 1.4 and 2.0 ... I still test Metacello >> against Pharo1.1 ... I would use zeroconf with 1.3 but there is something >> funkily different between what is available on zeroconf for 1.3 and what >> actually "works" for for 1.3 >> (https://gforge.inria.fr/frs/download.php/30567/PharoCore-1.3-13328.zip). > > why? I do not think anyone is using Pharo < 2.0 (and not even 2.0, with the > exception of some legacy apps) > this “forever backward compatibility” ends up being really complicated. > > I want to deprecate zeroconf for, at least, all pharo < 2.0. > > why? > because the scripts right now downloads one unique vm for all images. Which > means download of sources V1, V2, V3… and starting next month V4. > I want to remove at least one of those sources. > > Also… the upcoming spur VM will add another level of complexity to zeroconf > scripts (because is everything goes smooth, Pharo5 will dispatch with spur, > without backward compatibility). So it will be another V5 + the different VM… > > What to do with those scripts? > > maybe deprecate the “vm” part, and replace it for: > > /vm1 > /vm2 > /vm3 > /vm4 > /vmN > > … and /vm downloading the latest stable (/vm4, next month) > > but then… what to do with the > > /30+vm > /40+vm > > scripts? > yes… they *could* realise link is talking to “convenient vm” so it would > download /vm3 and /vm4… but I’m describing the problem, who grows > exponentially. > Keeping “forever compatibility” is not good. > It does not work. > It does not scale. > > Esteban > >> Dale >> >> On 3/13/15 5:04 AM, Damien Cassou wrote: >>> Esteban Lorenzano writes: >>> >>>> that… is someone using it? >>> I think the pharo-users mailing list is more appropriate >>> >> >> >
