Yes, this is good to put it in the image… I will update the website later, too.
can you make an issue? > On 17 Sep 2015, at 17:35, Torsten Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi Marcus, > > Could work - but is a fragile rule. We should document it somewhere. > > What about providing this info directly in the image. Alexandre has already > added a help topic on how > to contribute (but yet only for the slice process). > > I changed it so we can have the differences of config managed ones described > as well and > we can list the configs there. See the attached changeset that you can file > in into the latest > Pharo5.0 Latest update: #50329 > > File in and check "How to contribute to Pharo base code" topic in Help -> > Help Browser > > I guess this would be more clear to us and the users and we can simply point > to > the help info is someone asks. And look up ourself when we forgot. > > Thx > T. > >> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 17. September 2015 um 15:40 Uhr >> Von: "Marcus Denker" <[email protected]> >> An: "Pharo Development List" <[email protected]> >> Betreff: Re: [Pharo-dev] Contribution scheme confusing ... >> >>>> >>>> Also: >>>> I did a simple fix on NautilusGroupAutoBuilder package - there is >>>> a ConfigurationOfNautilusGroupAutoBuilder. But is it managed internally >>>> or externally now? >>>> >>> Even I can not tell you. >>> >> >> I think the rule we should adopt: if there is a dedicated repository defined >> in the image for a package, people should commit >> there. If there is non (just the inbox), then this should be used (with the >> Slice mechanism). >> >> The repositories in the image should be already up to date, I think. >> >> Marcus >> >> > <HowToContributeHelp class.TorstenBergmann.cs>
