Em 28/11/2009 21:19, Marcus Denker < [email protected] > escreveu:

>  On Nov 28, 2009, at 9:42 PM, [email protected] wrote:
>
> > I would like to know if  the past history of the method's versions
> >has been lost by design or accident.
> > In the core  image for example it is possible  only for the method
> > Object>>at: an entry "yo 6/29/2004 11:39".
> > Are we  considering the implementation  of Pharo as a  clean slate
> > and we'll start from some epoch date?

>  We had to make new .sources for 1.0... and even if not: the problem
> is that the .changes can only  be 32MB, and that is reached fast. In
> 3.9, we  even had to condense  changes in the middle  of the release
> cycle.  (This  is what  you get from  never moving on  from outdated
> technology....)

I see.  Then is an enviromental imposition ;-)

>  What I would want  to have is a server with all  old code that than
> is queried by the image...

Marcus,  let  me ask to put  in this  wish  list we could have  then a
versioning  system similar  to RCS/CVS  and family where  you name (in
fact  you number and  give then alias  names, but I  digress. . .) the
versions  and can  put  comments documenting the code  changes for the
non obvious things in code.
  
An escape hatch  for the .changes limit would  be to serialize all the 
versioning information in a .versions file.

--
Cesar Rabak


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

Reply via email to