Great, really! :) So, ideally we'd have ONE single config repo (MetacelloRepository), and Gofer project would look there, is that it?
2011/8/17 Dale Henrichs <[email protected]> > Bernat, > > A while ago, Esteban Lorenzano released the GoferProjectLoader[1] that > extends Gofer and allows one to load configurations. For example: > > Gofer project > load: 'Seaside30'; > load: 'Pier2'. > > loads the latest version of Seaside30 and then Pier2 ... there are options > for further control ... > > By default 'Gofer project' looks in the MetacelloRepository, which works > but right now subject to problems like the original complaint that started > this thread... > > Stef and I will be talking about the process and implementation for > "...looking up which repo and version are the suitable ones" so hopefully > we'll come out of ESUG with a plan of action to take care of this problem... > > Dale > > > [1] http://forum.world.st/ANN-Gofer-Project-Loader-1-0-BETA-td1596415.html > > ----- Original Message ----- > | From: "Bernat Romagosa" <[email protected]> > | To: [email protected] > | Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2011 11:30:30 AM > | Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Policy for storing metacello configurations > | > | I'm not sure whether this is one of the goals of the community or > | whether maybe someone's already heading in this direction, but > | something like Gofer install: #myPackage that looked up which repo > | and version are the suitable ones would really rock big time. The > | apt-get of Pharo, call it... > | > | > | To go on with the apt metaphor, Gofer search: 'whatever' could return > | a list of packages the descriptions/names of which matched > | 'whatever'. > | > | > | What do you think? > | > | > | > | 2011/8/17 Johan Brichau < [email protected] > > | > | > | Maybe a bit of wishful thinking but… > | > | Ideally, I think of the metacellorepository as a kind of 'smart > | folder' where all metacello configurations of public repositories > | are automatically included. > | Something like a smart mail folder on mac mail. > | > | Having two locations with the same package almost always leads to > | confusion / mistakes / forgetting / etc… > | > | Would such an 'automatic' repository be possible to implement in > | squeaksource3 and/or smalltalk hub? > | > | Johan > | > | > | > | > | On 17 Aug 2011, at 20:01, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: > | > | > > | > The policy should be > | > - put a configurationOf in your package > | > - publish when you want a copy of it in metacellorepository > | > > | > I will sit with dale sunday because we want the "publish" to copy > | > all the dependent package also in the > | > DistributionMetacelloRepository > | > > | > On Aug 17, 2011, at 8:59 AM, Max Leske wrote: > | > > | >> I would like to complain a bit about the current way Metacello > | >> configurations are distributed in different repositories. I ended > | >> up using the wrong configuration for two different projects twice > | >> in just two days. Apart from the date in the configuration file > | >> (and possibly the version number, although that's not as > | >> reliable) there's no easy way to tell which configuration is the > | >> most recent. > | >> > | >> Some people seem to have adopted MetacelloRepository as the > | >> standard repository for all configurations, others keep the > | >> configuration for a project in the project repositories and a > | >> third group uses both repositories (where one repository contains > | >> outdated versions of course…). > | >> > | >> Can we please agree on a simple policy on where to store the > | >> configuration for a project? I am sure that this would make life > | >> easier for all of us. > | >> > | >> Cheers, > | >> Max > | > > | > > | > | > | > | > | > | > | -- > | Bernat Romagosa. > | > > -- Bernat Romagosa.
