On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 9:47 PM, Frank Shearar <[email protected]>wrote:

> On 24 September 2011 20:40, Mariano Martinez Peck <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 9:34 PM, Frank Shearar <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >>
> >> On 24 September 2011 20:01, Mariano Martinez Peck <
> [email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >> > Well...Martin and I have been working a little bit this week and here
> is
> >> > a
> >> > post explaining it:
> >> >
> >> >
> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com/2011/09/24/importing-and-exporting-packages-with-fuel/
> >>
> >> Cool!
> >>
> >> If I understand correctly, Fuel and Monticello (1; I don't know
> >> anything about 2 other than noone seems to use it but it's much
> >> better) accomplish two different things though: Fuel's a mechanism to
> >> quickly load a bunch of stuff, while Monticello's much more
> >> introspective: mainly, a bunch of definitions of things, with a
> >> history pointing to previous versions of the package.
> >>
> >
> > Yes.
> >
> >>
> >> I don't see how Fuel could replace Monticello,
> >
> > No, Fuel won't replace Monticello at all. They are different things.
>
> Ah, OK. That means I misinterpreted "As you may imagine the idea is
> that maybe in the future we can replace Monticello’ mcz with Fuel
> packages." You meant in the sense of an mcz being something you load
> in your image, not somehow extending Fuel to a version control system
> (which would ... not make sense :) ).
>
>
Exactly. Maybe the comment was not clear. What I mean is to change
Monticello in the way that instead of serializing code into a mzc that
contains the sources and the use the compiler, use Fuel to directly
store/load the code in a binary way.
Is that better explained?



> >> then, except in the
> >> sense of "here's a chunk of stuff you can load into your image" -
> >> which makes me think that one could simply replace the snapshot.bin
> >> with a snapshot.fuel (or simply put it in the same directory, for a
> >> loss in space but a gain in compatibility) and you'd have a much
> >> faster loading mcz, right?
> >
> > Exactly. With Monticello right now you have to compile the sources.st,
> which
> > may be slow and even more you need the compiler. The idea is to
> experiment a
> > way of using Monticello to directly store binary/already compiled code.
> > This way, it may be faster for exporting/importing the code.
> > So....in summary, we will try to experiment to replace only a small part
> of
> > Monticello ;)
>
> Ah, excellent! I can't wait!
>
> >> frank
> >>
> >> > Cheers
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Sep 23, 2011 at 12:09 PM, Sven Van Caekenberghe <
> [email protected]>
> >> > wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> On 23 Sep 2011, at 11:47, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Cool Martin. Now I could do it as well. I have exported the groups
> >> >> > 'Core', 'Tests' and 'Zinc-Seaside'.
> >> >> > Then I materialize it a clean image and all tests (1567) are green.
> >> >> > And
> >> >> > it only takes 7 seconds :)
> >> >>
> >> >> Great !
> >> >>
> >> >> I want to try this myself soon.
> >> >>
> >> >> Sven
> >> >>
> >> >> _______________________________________________
> >> >> seaside mailing list
> >> >> [email protected]
> >> >> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Mariano
> >> > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
> >> >
> >> >
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Mariano
> > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
> >
> >
>
>


-- 
Mariano
http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

Reply via email to