> > | > | let us know how you want that we proceed. > > I will have to look at the changes themselves to determine which direction to > go ... if the changes are isolated enough I'd be inclined to hide them in > MetacelloPlatform ... that's where the platform uglies go ... If the changes > are extensive, then I'd consider extracting out a > filedirectory[1]/filesystem[2] utilities package (as was done for zinc and > filetree).
I have the impression when I checked all the changes that they are minor but impacting (FS for example) > [1] > https://github.com/dalehenrich/filetree/tree/pharo2.0/repository/MonticelloFileTree-FileDirectory-Utilities.package > [2] > https://github.com/dalehenrich/filetree/tree/pharo2.0/repository/MonticelloFileTree-FileSystem-Utilities.package > | > | - for the tests (not version 10.32 that I cannot load - I will have a > look > > Metacello 1.0-beta.32 is the Metacello Preview version (not yet released > anywhere) and porting that version stopped me cold last summer ... OSProcess > was the final straw:) Ok I could not load it because ProfStef was not found but I can retry. > | at profStef to make it 2.0 aware I guess that this is that the problem) > | runCase refers to SystemNotifier > | > | > versions accesssor => look really suspicious) > > Yeah, that looks very suspicious and tests won't pass without that puppy:) yes to me it looks really strange. > > | 'Metacello-TestsTutorial-dkh.33'; > | package: 'Metacello-ToolBox' with: > | 'Metacello-ToolBox-dkh.130' > | -> > Metacello-ToolBox-MarcusDenker.135 > | > | here this is strange because the > version of the toolbox in Pharo is > | based on 135 134 133 132 131 127 126 > .... so should we take another > | version of the toolbox? > | May be there was a mistake from our side to take a wrong branch. > > You are on the right branch, Metacello-ToolBox-dkh.130 is okay (it's part of > Metacello 1.0-beta.31.1.5) but Metacello-ToolBox-dkh.131 is part of the > Preview release. We do not use 130 but 135 so we are using the wrong branch. So do you have idea of experience we should run. I think that we should try to load metacello-Toolbox.130 and check the tests.
