But Timestamp was already removed completely from 4.0, why re-add it, even deprecated ?
I am sure many external packages are already modified, I know I did it for mine. > On 02 Sep 2015, at 13:19, Marcus Denker <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> On 02 Sep 2015, at 12:32, stepharo <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hi guille >> >> there is not stress. I just wanted to let you know. >> I was wondering if just subclassing DateAndTime would not be enough for now. > > Yes, as far as I remember Timestamp was just an empy subclass. > > We could: > > -> add it back to Deprecated50 or maybe even to a “Compatibility” package > -> Write a Quality Check rule. > >> I will go back to code with Pharo 40 >> >> stef >> >> Le 2/9/15 10:30, Guillermo Polito a écrit : >>> If somebody can check it and fix it it would be good :). I've just started >>> my new job and my evenings are busy looking for an apartment or staying in >>> a hostel without a proper internet connection... >>> >>> If not, I think we can wait a bit. The first step should be enabling CI >>> jobs for pharo5. Also, I do not think the intersection between 'people >>> using garage opendbx' and 'people using pharo5' is that big to justify a >>> rush. >>> >>> Guille >>> >>> El mié., 2 de sept. de 2015 a la(s) 10:12 a. m., stepharo >>> <[email protected]> escribió: >>> for your info... >>> >>> Garage-OpenDBX does not load on Pharo 50 because it uses Timestamp >>> >>> Stef >>> >> >
