> This is something that I can't understand. Is this supposed to be a > package management system per se, a la Metacello, aptitude, yum?? > Isn't just a installer of MC packages but tries to manage the MC > database of packages in a way that is clean and *atomic*?
No, as it says on the first line, it is a tool to perform basic Monticello operations on multiple packages. It is based on scripts that we wrote to handle the 70+ Seaside 3.0 packages, as well as code we wrote for Flair, a system that has similar goals than Metacello, but is now discontinued in favor of Metacello. Maybe Metacello will use Gofer as its loader. > So, there will be a registry of gofer installed operations so that can > be utilized after the install operation (maybe months later)? No. Unless you store them somewhere. The class-side of Gofer has some examples for common set of packages. > Or will just be for trying to install some group of packages and if some > error happens immediatly revert? No. It uses the normal tools available through Monticello, but provides a convenient interface. Furthermore it runs some additional code to keep the image in a clean state. For example it ensures that every working copy has an repository assigned, that repositories pointing to the same physical location are of the same instance, that unused repositories get removed again, that categories are properly ordered, that unload operations do not leave empty categories and protocols, etc. > Can you relate the scenarios showing how gofer is intended to use, > because until now (maybe my narrow perspective) the examples shown can > be done also with ScriptLoader and Installer. Maybe the loading part can be performed by these tools (but then again they mess up with the repositories), but not really the other operations. > Other thing, I tried to convert my image install script but I can't > finish because I install packages from monticello configurations (magma > 1.0r42) and from my local directory repository. Neither of those options > can be handled by gofer (as far as I can see). Of course this can be > corrected, it is just to integrate the correct MC installer classes. Gofer is designed for Monticello only. > That reminds me other thing, Installer can handle monticello > configurations, is the corresponding way of loading the packages using > gofer to list each package in the mcm file in a gofer script? So mcm > will not used or it is just that there have no been time to add those > capability to gofer? Yeah, a Gofer specification is very similar to a Monticello Configuration. In fact when you use specific versions it is basically the same, but then again it messes up with the repositories and categories, something that drives me mad for years already :-) Cheers, Lukas -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
