Fair enough, but I think you are drawing questionable distictions between tool and implemtation details. There is little difference between Loader (good) as a separate class and helper methods on the class side of Gofer (bad). Of course, if we could easily put some loose methods on the class side of Gofer, we would not be searching for a pakage management system (we'd already have one).
Loader will be welcome. Bill -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Miguel Enrique Cobá Martinez Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 4:37 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Pharo core and Seaside 3.0 El mar, 12-01-2010 a las 16:29 -0500, Schwab,Wilhelm K escribió: > I am trying understand how to cope with yet another change. In my own world, > newer is always better (to avoid losing work), and anything more > sophisticated than that will only cause trouble. > > No argument that a package management system is a good thing for > complicated projects released to large audiences. But I fail to see > how having all of using many lines of code for (what should be for the > consumer) simple tasks does any good over > > Gofer loadSeaside28 But that is the task that Loader is aiming for. Remember, one tool for each task. Gofer can remain clean. And Loader can be as short as possible for end users. And remember, Loader hasn't been announced yet. So until that, lets not add more than necessary functionality to the current tools. Cheers. > > with its entrails coded in terms of the correct way to load the thing. The > way this is trending, you will end up with people using the wrong version or > whatever else is needed to make the package management system do the right > thing. > > Bill > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > Miguel Enrique Cobá Martinez > Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 4:14 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Pharo core and Seaside 3.0 > > El mar, 12-01-2010 a las 14:41 -0500, Schwab,Wilhelm K escribió: > > With stipulation of the fact that helper methods can be taken too > > far, what is wrong with something like > > > > Gofer loadSeaside28? > > > > Answer: nothing if it hides the details of using the configuration. The > > problem with the FFI, Seaside, etc. load methods is not that they exist, it > > is that they use obsolete techniques and/or are broken. > > > > One question in my mind is how to replace ScriptLoader > > class>>loadLatestPackage:fromRepository:. Will > > > > Gofer new > > add:packageName; > > repository:aRepository; > > load > > > > take care of that? > > Have you at least read the tutorial of Metacello, they very clearly show why > is necessary a package management tool and not only a packag installer (what > gofer is). > > Remember, one tool for the job. A tool can't do everything. The best is to > have gofer to download/install/uninstall/update/remove individual packages > inside the image, and metacello keep track of dependencies, configuration, > groups of packages loaded together, groups of packages for distinct forks, > etc. > > And again, ScriptLoader, as I understand it, was never intended for public > comsumption. It is in the image because the group releasing pharo and squeak > was very small and needed a tool for preparing the image in a time when no > proper package management tool existed. Now that tool exist and there is no > reason to keep the old tools no matter how many pages you find in google > pointing to obsolete instructions. They will be substituted by new > docs/tutorials/blog posts that use the new tools. > > Meanwhile, there will be confusion, granted, but in the end it will be better > than the mess we have now. > > Cheers > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: [email protected] > > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of > > Stéphane Ducasse > > Sent: Tuesday, January 12, 2010 1:36 PM > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Pharo core and Seaside 3.0 > > > > > > On Jan 12, 2010, at 7:25 PM, Lukas Renggli wrote: > > > > >> And also the class side install methods of Gofer please. > > >> > > >> Lets clean the way for Gofer as downloader/installer, Metacello > > >> as package management tools. > > > > > > These are examples to demonstrate how gofer works. They are not > > > supposed to be called for loading stuff. > > > > > > I am just using them all the time to keep my images up to date :-) > > > > :) > > well this was the same for scriptLoader :) I will pay attention to > > scriptLoader > > > > Stef > > > > > > > > Lukas > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Lukas Renggli > > > http://www.lukas-renggli.ch > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Pharo-project mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-projec > > > t > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 > > -- > Miguel Cobá > http://miguel.leugim.com.mx > > > _______________________________________________ > 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 -- Miguel Cobá http://miguel.leugim.com.mx _______________________________________________ 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
