2009/7/17 Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]>: > > On Jul 17, 2009, at 6:23 PM, Douglas Brebner wrote: > >> Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >>> The problem doug is that it is unclear if all the features are needed >>> and what is the status of the implementation. I do not know what are >>> orphanage, scripts, upgrade upgrade, file....... >> >> Well, it was my understanding that this version of MC, PackageInfo and >> Installer were the ones which were intended to become the portable >> versions that all Squeak forks would use. > > > Well yes this is the intention of keith. > It was a bold challenge. Now if you look at Installer you get a lot of > things you > do not need. > installer is mainly a DSL for installing a stuff. It doesn't implementing a facilities which actually doing the work, just provides you a convenient abstractions for using them. It is generic, and covers multiple ways of installing code into system. Sure, you are free to use just those which is good for you. As to me it is compact enough, to not think about carving out unused things :)
>>> We just did not update to MC1.5 because we are idiot or blind. >> >> I never claimed you were :( > > I did not mean you did :) > this was a subliminal message to others :) > >> >>> First we were focusing on something else and also when something is >>> working for you then it is difficult to try something new and risky >>> since it can stall the complete process. I do not even know what LFP >>> is doing in our back. >> >> As I understand it, this approach only upgrades Installer, >> PackaageInfo >> and Monticello, it doesn't include the rest of LPF. >> >>> Now the key point is that if somebody in the pharo community stand up >>> and take the **huge** and painful job to have a **real** look at >>> MC1.5/1.6 and to be here as a fireman then there is a chance that we >>> use it. Not just saying yes it works (which is already a challenge as >>> I noticed it these days). >> >> Yes, but my response was only to do with solving the the loading >> problem >> you had. Not that every MC problem had been solved :) > > ;) > Anyway this is a long way to go but we should go there step by step. > Welcome to pharo. > >> >>> >>> Stef >>> >>> >>> >>>> Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >>>>> I checked a bit but actualClassIn: in MC1.6 depends on >>>>> MCMethodDefinition having theClass as instanceVariable. >>>>> >>>>> The results of this experience is clearly showing me that merging >>>>> between fork is nearly impossible. I already lost some days on >>>>> that issues and I think that we will stay with a slow MC for now. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> Isn't the version loaded by the following code from my other mail >>>> the already merged version of 1.5/1.6? (I believe that 1.6 is just >>>> 1.5 with atomic loading enabled) >>>> >>>> Preferences enable: #allowBlockArgumentAssignment. Preferences >>>> disable: #raiseDepreciatedWarnings. Installer upgrade upgrade. >>>> Installer install: 'UpgradeMonticelloBootstrap'. >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
