This debate/conversation arises every so often, and it is always informative.  
There are two camps: those who (almost?) never save an image, and those who 
move images around.  FWIW, I fall into the latter category.  One good thing 
about _not_ saving images is that it will force full understanding of what you 
put into an image and how to load it.  Given the time required to load things 
like Seaside, you will probably want to have at least a base image that you use 
and then perhaps file in (or use MC to load) your code on top of that.

Since I like to use an image for a while, I became a big fan of Zip disks; USB 
drives are now so big and cheap that they are now the transport of choice.

To whatever extent you choose to save and move images, a few tips.  Try to be 
aware of how to build the image from source (which you should save 
periodically) in case you get into trouble.  I use a home-grown tool called 
Migrate to help me; it's in the in-box if you have any interest.  Periodic 
backups (image/changes and sources if you ever change the latter) are a good 
idea.  The usual rules apply: you only have to back up what you can't afford to 
lose =:0   I save myself a lot of trouble by getting an image ready to test 
something "dangerous" - new FFI code, in Dolphin at least, opening a newly 
modified presenter could be the last thing one does in an image, etc.  You will 
gradually build your own list of "I fried an image this way once..." and learn 
when to take an extra backup.   Get the image ready to take the dangerous step, 
meaning browsers open, text ready to select or already selected, etc., and then 
save the image.  Maybe make a backup and verify that it loads.  Then take the 
plunge, if it goes wrong, learn what you can, and then exit w/o saving.  It 
adds a few iterations to a fix compared to fixing and saving, but you will have 
fewer corrupt images over time.  If all you ever save is code, the worries of 
corruption are reduced, but you need to keep track of the code and how to load 
it.

Either way, Happy Smalltalking!

Bill



________________________________________
From: [email protected] 
[[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tony Fleig 
[[email protected]]
Sent: Thursday, October 28, 2010 7:47 PM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Sharing a image between several computers

I haven't been doing this long, but I use Monticello to move my packages 
between a Mac and 2 Linux systems. Its much faster than copying an image around.

TF

On Thu, Oct 28, 2010 at 2:39 PM, Oscar E A Callau 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Hi all,

      I've been programming in Smalltalk/Pharo for a time, and it is really 
nice (I love it). Usually, I work with several images at my work and home. I 
share those images using dropbox. However it is not practical, if your images 
size are 100+ MB (because dropbox is synchronizing each time that you save).

So I was wondering If you use a more practical software to share your images 
between several computers.

Greetings
       Oscar





Reply via email to