Mariano, On Fri, Sep 16, 2011 at 2:57 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck <[email protected]> wrote: >
[skip] >> >> I am not saving any code, only data. But if Fuel provided a way to >> overlay application-specific code over the generic image, this way of >> binary deployment would be very convenient. > > Yes, "Fuel" *would* provide a way to manage code. I won't be Fuel, but a > tool build on top of Fuel. Fuel is just a plain serializer. On top of that, > we have started to prototype a code exporter/loader. > So far, you can see what it is in the package FuelPackageLoader. We could > export Seaside and load it in a clean image. It took less than 15 seconds :) OK, great. > But...be aware we are not taking into account/doing a lot of stuff that > Monticello does, like: > - System notifications > - Validations > - Recompilations > -Conflicts with classes already present in the image where we load > -others Well I doubt that project loader in old Squeak did (m)any of these. Thanks. -- Dimitry Golubovsky Anywhere on the Web
