Adrian Lienhard wrote:
> Hi Damien,
>
> Let me try to understand your suggestion. You would use Sake-Packages  
> instead of a Universe. As far as I see, a Sake-Package models the  
> same information as one in a Universe (that is, name, description,  
> dependencies, source location, etc.), right? Hence, the main  
> difference is that this information can be managed with MC instead of  
> a XML. Furthermore, as you suggest, we could share package definitions  
> between different Pharo versions and even between Pharo and Squeak.
>
> Questions:
> - Is there a GUI frontend for Sack-Packages like for Universes? I  
> think some way is needed to allow people more easily browser the  
> provided packages. If it didn't exist, which I expect, I assume it  
> would not be hard to build one.
>   
Browsing is done via a Class browser.
> - How do users that already have installed Sacke-Packages (I guess we  
> would pre-install it in the Pharo distro), get the most recent version  
> of the package definitions? Obviously, they should always  
> automatically get the most recent one.
>   
Installer ss project: 'Packages'; install: 'Packages-Library'.

or

Packages current load: 'Packages'.

or (for short)

Packages update.
> - How would you manage the differences between Squeak and Pharo  
> universes?
PackagesDev is the superclass of both PackagesPharo01 and
PackagesSqueak310 so you simply have to move the definitions to the
appropriate place.

I would hope that as many packages as possible stay compatible with
both, and can remain in the PackagesDev superclass.  However I expect to
have to provide compatability features that enable Pharo reliant
packages to be supported in Squeak. (i.e. Author)

Keith


_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

Reply via email to