impressive you guys are busy non stop, I am feel so glad Pharo move forward so fast.
No I did not mean to remove configurations but rather hide them, or group them together so they dont display together with other packages. On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 12:01 AM stepharo <[email protected]> wrote: > First it could be worse :) We cannot build a full ecosystem without > capturing dependencies. > > Second we are (christophe) working since a year on the Cargo Package > Manager. > [Christophe knows many package manager (Java ruby and others).] > With Cargo every single package expresses its dependencies instead of > using external packages such as a Configuration. > So we will see how it goes. > > Stef > > > One of the things that annoy me is how many Configurations and Baselines > pollute the package space that are of little interest to the user. It would > be nice to group them and filter them out of Nautilus unless user asks for > them. > > I really like this new approach great work. > > On Sun, Aug 16, 2015 at 7:34 PM stepharo <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> >> Le 16/8/15 17:00, Sean P. DeNigris a écrit : >> > stepharo wrote >> >> you get a project (group) with all your packages together ready to >> work ;) >> > Cool! I feel more and more that the standard "Package" pane is only >> useful >> > for... packaging, and when one takes off the dependency management hat >> and >> > puts the user hat on (i.e. most of the time), what you really want >> there is >> > a logical view of the system. So I see three use cases: >> > - Logical view of the system - I guess this was the original intention >> of >> > Categories, but has been hijacked by Monticello >> > - By project - which, as you just showed, we have now, yay! >> > - By package - the least useful, but primary (up til now), view >> >> Indeed. >> We will see what we get at the end but may be something like >> >> MyProject >> AnotherProject >> System >> LowLevel >> >> And people will not be overwhelmed by hundreds of nice packages. :) >> >> I think that touching package contents under the assumption that the >> package list is too long in the UI >> is the wrong way to look at the problem. >> Packages are unit of deployment and we need Projects - unit of >> knowledge. And the UI should shows both >> depending on the view we want to get. >> >> Stef >> > >> > >> > >> > ----- >> > Cheers, >> > Sean >> > -- >> > View this message in context: >> http://forum.world.st/Projects-are-slowly-getting-to-live-and-tp4843277p4843286.html >> > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at >> Nabble.com. >> > >> > >> > >> >> >> >
