On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 08:57:55PM +0200, St?phane Ducasse wrote: > Hi david > > I think that you should wait. 1.1 is stable and out.
Thanks Stef, good advice, that's what I will do. Dave > 1.2 is in flux. When 1.2 gets in beta this will be time to settle down > things. > Cyrille I know why you want 1.2 version else you cannot build a hudson > working solution > to run top of the edge version. Now I will do the changes suggested by henrik > to get a backward compatible version. > I suggest to use metacello to control version now I understand that people > want to avoid branching > now it means that we (the people working on the unstable stream may lack > tools but this is ok). > > Stef > > On Sep 3, 2010, at 6:30 PM, David T. Lewis wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 03, 2010 at 01:03:31PM +0200, Cyrille Delaunay wrote: > >> Hello, > >> > >> I would suggest to replace the two methods > >> -------------------------------------------------------------- > >> OSPRocess class >> platformName > >> "After Squeak version 3.6, #platformName was moved to SmalltalkImage " > >> > >> ^ ((Smalltalk classNamed: 'SmalltalkImage') > >> ifNil: [^ Smalltalk platformName]) current platformName > >> > >> OSPRocess class >> osVersion > >> "After Squeak version 3.6, #osVersion was moved to SmalltalkImage " > >> > >> ^ ((Smalltalk classNamed: 'SmalltalkImage') > >> ifNil: [^ Smalltalk osVersion]) current osVersion > >> > >> -------------------------------------------------------------- > >> by: > >> ------------------------------------------------------------- > >> OSProcess class >> platformName > >> ^ ((Smalltalk classNamed: 'OSPlatform') > >> ifNil: [ > >> (Smalltalk classNamed: 'SmalltalkImage') current > >> ifNil: [^ Smalltalk platformName]]) platformName > >> > >> OSProcess class >> osVersion > >> ^ ((Smalltalk classNamed: 'OSPlatform') > >> ifNil: [ > >> (Smalltalk classNamed: 'SmalltalkImage') current > >> ifNil: [^ Smalltalk osVersion]]) osVersion > >> ------------------------------------------------------------ > >> > >> to avoid deprecation messages when using it in Pharo 1.2. Does it looks > >> good? I'm not able to publish on the squeaksource repository > > > > This failed on the first Pharo image that I tried, which was a > > Pharo-1.1-11400-rc2dev10.06.1 image. I think this is the subject > > of some recent refactoring, so I'm not sure if it's safe to use > > it yet (will somebody try to load OSProcess in one of the images > > that has OSPlatform but that does not yet have the #platformName > > refactoring?). > > > > I expect that there are several versions of Pharo in general > > circulation, so can someone give me some guidance as to whether > > it is safe to code for "OSPlatform current platformName" as the > > expected idiom on Pharo, or should we wait a while and live with > > the deprecation warnings? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Dave > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > 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 _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
