Hi I think it would be better to have ConfigurationOfRefactoring and two other: ConfigurationOfOB and ConfigurationOfO2, which have the former as a required project (and IIUC it was your first intention, right?). This will reduce duplication of dependencies between projects.
2009/12/19 Mariano Martinez Peck <marianop...@gmail.com>: > Hi folks. Now that I am starting to write some configurations, I realized > that we have a "change of concept" with Metacello. With Gofer or Installer > (someone tell me if I am wrong) we are use to manage projects that are a > certain repository of squeaksource or similar. And then we have the > packages. So, for example we are talking about the RefactoringBrowser, you > have: > > www.squeaksource.com/rb > > and the packages AST-Core, Refactoring-Core and Refactoring-Spelling. > > Then there is the project OB where you have also OB-Refactory and OB-Regex > for example. > > At first, of course, I thought to have one ConfigurationOf per project. I > mean, map one to one. But now...I was wondering that I can have a > ConfigurationOfRefactoring for example, that can deals with ALL the things > related to RB. In this case AST-Core, Refactoring-Core and > Refactoring-Spelling from rb repo and OB-Refactory and OB-Regex from OB > repo....and see all of them like a project. > > What do you think ? Do you have any thoughts with this? pors and cons? I > would like to listen opinions. > > Cheers, > > Mariano > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
