FileDirectory is the current show-stopper ... with FileDirectory back I will move forward on getting the Preview working on Pharo-2.0
DAle ----- Original Message ----- | From: "Stéphane Ducasse" <[email protected]> | To: [email protected] | Sent: Saturday, August 4, 2012 12:01:25 AM | Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] [Seaside] Re: [Metacello] What is the plan with Pharo changes? | | BTW we discussed about it yesterday and I proposed that we keep the | FileDirectory package for compatibility even if we are in 2.0. | Dale I imagine that it would solve your problem. | Stef | | | On Aug 4, 2012, at 8:54 AM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote: | | > Dale | > | > Can we use an old version of Metacello that we maintain? | > Then we migrate when needed and this is ok. | > | > Stef | > | > | >> | > What I'd _like_ to do for Metacello and Pharo-2.0 is to make | >> | > the | >> | > changes against the MetacelloPreview release, which I'm | >> | > managing | >> | > on github. | >> | > | >> | > The MetacelloPreview is aimed at an eventual 1.0 release of | >> | > Metacello (hopefully in the fall). | >> | > | >> | > I would _like_ Metacello-Base to be included in the Pharo-2.0 | >> | > base | >> | > image, the sooner the better and I'm poised to pull the | >> | > trigger on | >> | > that, but the recent changes have crippled FileTree ... | >> | > | >> | yeah.. we talking about it all the time "how good it would be to | >> | have | >> | metacello preloaded in image" :) | >> | | >> | > So until FileTree is functional again, I can't really do | >> | > anything | >> | > with Pharo-2.0... | >> | > | >> | > Hacking Metacello to get it running on Pharo-2.0 doesn't help | >> | > _me_ | >> | > move forward. | >> | > | >> | | >> | You can tell how they could help, so they will (if they will | >> | still | >> | want), leaving less work for you :) Of course, if you need help | >> | or | >> | can | >> | see where it can be useful. | >> | But i know it is hard to coordinate & organize activities.. | >> | sometimes | >> | harder than doing everything alone. :) | >> | >> The bigger problem is that I have to have a code base that runs on | >> multiple platforms while being maintainable, so a "port" to | >> Pharo-2.0 is only a starting point. In the case of FileTree, | >> which is the real bottleneck there's a lot code that is written | >> against the FileDirectory API, so there will need to be | >> significant work to find a way to keep a common code base .... a | >> much tougher problem, than "just getting it working", it can be | >> solved with time, but I didn't budget time for an emergency | >> rewrite of FileTree ... today. | >> | >> | | >> | > It is likely that I will have to redo whatever hacks that are | >> | > done | >> | > to get it running on Pharo-2.0 to be compatible with the rest | >> | > of | >> | > platforms that I am supporting and doing it right takes a | >> | > little | >> | > more effort ... | >> | > | >> | yes.. it is hard to keep up with moving target.. But i hope this | >> | is | >> | for good of us all (FileSystem ,as to me, is no doubt much | >> | better | >> | comparing to what we had before). | >> | >> Oh don't get me wrong, I agree with the overall goals ... I | >> actually think that renaming FileDirectory to | >> ObsoleteFileDirectory (and keeping the implementation) would be a | >> good compromise ... I can easily switch class names for the short | >> term which then buys me time for doing a proper rewrite ... | >> | >> | | >> | > So if you are just going to hack around to get things running | >> | > on | >> | > Pharo-2.0 I guess I would have to say that I don't care what | >> | > you | >> | > do, because the hacks don't make my job any easier. | >> | > | >> | > Dale | >> | > | >> | | >> | -- | >> | Best regards, | >> | Igor Stasenko. | >> | _______________________________________________ | >> | seaside mailing list | >> | [email protected] | >> | http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside | >> | | >> | > | > | | |
