On 19 March 2011 15:53, Igor Stasenko <[email protected]> wrote: > On 19 March 2011 08:11, Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Is this a conscious decision to have an unique package per each >>> category name, or just a technical limitation? >> >> RPAckage has nothing to do with category matching: a package is a list of >> classes and methods. >> >> Now the problem is simply the following: >> >> you have a MC package FOO >> it contains FOO-Cat1 >> >> you load it: ok the loader could create >> RPAckage Foo >> and put FOO classes and Foo-Cat Classes in it >> >> Now you create a new category >> FOO-z what should I do >> add it to FOO >> create a package Foo-z >> >> We would like to get rid of the naming convention and matching on categories >> now we could have tags >> but tags should orthogonal to packages. >> > No. The process should be different: > > You marking an active package (in same way as currently we having an > active changeset). > Then anything you do (any classes or methods you creating) is going > straightly to that package. > > Now, what to do if you hacking around or do refactoring over multiple > classes in multiple packages: > - you can say that for the time of your hacking session a methods you > changing/adding should belong to same packages > as their classes (instead of adding methods to single active package > as extensions). > This should be default behavior. >
Or, since you doing new environment-tied browser, you can say to single browser instance: please stick with this package, and for another instance - stick with another. Then anything you do in browser goes to these package(s). >> >>> I'd prefer to have a package which can allow an arbitrary category >>> names in future. It may be that tools like browser are not prepared >>> for that.. >>> but not an internal information of package. To my thinking , classes >>> which belong to package could have any category names.. >>> Names should not mean anything.. it is just for humans. >>> > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko AKA sig. > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
