On 19.01.2011, at 20:54, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:

> But now if the server of lukas is eaten by monsters during the night or if 
> you don't have your cool distributions containing all the nice
> packages of the version you want to load you are toasted. Simple just 
> toasted. 
> So when I program with pharo 1.1 I just want to get the work done and load 
> the components loading in pharo1.1 so I open the repositoryOfTheDsitibution 
> and I load the tools I need.
> 
> If I need something more advanced I decide to go in the project and check if 
> I can load the version may be developed on 1.2, 1,3 in my version.
> Or I change and switch to that distribution. 
> 
> So the act of publishing a configuration should not be just a copy this is a 
> publication for inclusion in distribution.
> 
If it is not just a copy what else is implied? 

Norbert

> 
>> 
>>> But that kind of duplication will lead to having always not up to date
>>> configurations...
>>> 
>>> Why not having something like a meta "configuration" (I'm not thinking
>>> in a metacello config, but maybe) that knows which are the current
>>> configurations and where to find them?  And that config would let us
>>> build tools on top of it...
>> 
>> Agreed!
>> 
>>> 
>>> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 3:01 PM, Dale Henrichs <[email protected]
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>   I think that the a good working model is to store the
>>>   ConfigurationOfXXX in the project repository along with the project
>>>   mcz files.
>>> 
>>>   When a new version is released the configuration should be copied to
>>>   MetacelloRepository for the Pharo and Squeak community. I have a
>>>   GemSource MetacelloRepository where I put copies of configurations
>>>   that have been ported to GemStone .... when a new version for
>>>   GemStone is available.
>>> 
>>>   I would not recommend that configurations be removed from
>>>   MetacelloRepository as that could break existing configurations that
>>>   expect to find the configuration there. So if it is found that there
>>>   are out-of-date configurations in MetacelloRepository, a new version
>>>   of the configuration should be copied into MetacelloRepository.
>>> 
>>>   Now that Metacello is more established, I don't think that it is
>>>   critical to require that all configurations be copied to
>>>   MetacelloRepository.
>>> 
>>>   It still is useful to have a sort of clearinghouse for
>>>   configurations and until a better solution comes along it serves
>>>   that purpose. BTW, I think Stef has plans to provide better
>>>   solutions for Pharo...
>>> 
>>>   Dale
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>   On 01/19/2011 06:12 AM, laurent laffont wrote:
>>> 
>>>       On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 2:49 PM, Norbert Hartl
>>>       <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>       <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>>           On 19.01.2011, at 14:30, laurent laffont wrote:
>>> 
>>>               On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 1:37 PM, Norbert Hartl
>>>           <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>           <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>                   It depends where you look at.
>>>           ConfigurationOfXMLSupport exists
>>>                   in MetacelloRepository as well as in XMLSupport. The
>>>           latter
>>>                   one being the official one, the former one being very
>>>                   outdated. My sugesstion would be to remove
>>>                   ConfigurationOfXMLSupport from MetacelloRepository
>>>           to lower
>>>                   the confusion.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>               Personnally I always look in MetacelloRepository, this
>>>           should be
>>>               the reference IMHO.
>>> 
>>>           Laurent,
>>> 
>>>           I think it is up to the maintainers where to put those
>>>       files. And in
>>>           the XMLSupport case the decision was made deliberately not
>>>       to put it
>>>           in MetacelloRepository but in XMLSupport. The only thing I
>>>       want to
>>>           avoid is having multiple different files floating around
>>>       that are
>>>           edited in an inconsistent way.
>>> 
>>> 
>>>       I thought that all ConfigurationOfXXX working for Pharo should
>>>       be put in
>>>       MetacelloRepository so we have a central place to look at.
>>> 
>>>       But I may be wrong.  Mariano ? Dale ?
>>> 
>>>       Laurent
>>> 
>>> 
>>>           Norbert
>>> 
>>> 
>>>                   Norbert
>>> 
>>>                   On 19.01.2011, at 13:18, Tudor Girba wrote:
>>> 
>>>> The last version 1.1.6 is marked as #release.
>>>> 
>>>> Cheers,
>>>> Doru
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On 19 Jan 2011, at 12:26, laurent laffont wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> I put ConfigurationOfXMLSupport version 1.0 because
>>>                   blessing was #release. But I agree to change.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Laurent
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Marcus Denker
>>>           <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>           <mailto:[email protected]
>>>           <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Jan 19, 2011, at 11:43 AM, Tudor Girba wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Indeed, this is a problem for Moose in general. We depend
>>>                   on XMLSupport, but now we cannot update it in
>>>           PharoDev. I
>>>                   would also strongly support the idea of removing
>>>           XMLSupport
>>>                   from PharoDev.
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> What would be important: we need the latest version in
>>>                   Pharo 1.2... else how can we ever have a version
>>>           where the
>>>                   tests are green?
>>>>> (not of XML, but in general)
>>>>> 
>>>>>     Marcus
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Cheers,
>>>>>> Doru
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 19 Jan 2011, at 11:32, Fabrizio Perin wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I have a problem with the XMLSupport version from
>>>           Pharo 1.2.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> The problem is that I need to work with one of the last
>>>                   version of XMLSupport but in the pharo image 1.2 is
>>>           loaded an
>>>                   old version of XMLSupport (I mean a version from Jan
>>>           2010). I
>>>                   did try to load a newer version of XMLSupport using
>>>                   ConfigurationOfXMLSupport but some errors make this
>>>           operation
>>>                   impossible.
>>>>>>> So either Pharo-dev 1.2 load a newer (possibly the last)
>>>                   version of XMLSupport by default or Pharo-dev 1.2
>>>           should not
>>>                   load XMLSupport at all.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I think that doesn't make sense to use by default such an
>>>                   old version, also considering that the last
>>>           XMLSupport has
>>>                   nice and useful features like the
>>>           XMLPluggableElementFactory.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> By avoiding to load XMLSupport in Pharo-dev 1.2 by
>>>                   default you let people free to use the version that
>>>           they like.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Fabrizio
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> www.tudorgirba.com <http://www.tudorgirba.com>
>>>           <http://www.tudorgirba.com/>
>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> "We cannot reach the flow of things unless we let go."
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Marcus Denker  -- http://www.marcusdenker.de
>>>           <http://www.marcusdenker.de/>
>>>>> INRIA Lille -- Nord Europe. Team RMoD.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> www.tudorgirba.com <http://www.tudorgirba.com>
>>>           <http://www.tudorgirba.com/>
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> "If you interrupt the barber while he is cutting your hair,
>>>> you will end up with a messy haircut."
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
> 


Reply via email to