On Mar 3, 2013, at 9:52 PM, Torsten Bergmann <[email protected]> wrote:
> Stef,
>
> this is not a problem of SqS. I copied the two new versions
> manually today back from MetacelloRepository to the SqS/Pastell
> repo since it looks like they were missing there.
strange because I just queried from the pastell ss repo and my script is always
the same
I always use this one and when there is no config I look around.
| go |
go := Gofer new.
go squeaksource: 'DrGeo'.
(go allResolved select: [ :each | 'DrGeo*' match: each packageName])
do: [ :pack |
pack packageName crLog.
go package: pack packageName; fetch]
> This is historic and from the time when usually sqS/MetacelloRepository
> was used for all configurations.
I do not think so.
Because I do not look at MetacelloRepository to migrate packages.
I pushed there after I'm done.
> It's not a real problem that the numbers have changed - I dont think many
> people reference Pastell. I already updated my other configs.
I will follow the semantics versioning now (not now). At least I can understand
1.2.0 now.
Probably that we should reify these boring strings but for that we need tools.
but I will copy and paste the semantics else nobody will ever understand it.
This is why we need tools to build configurations.
> If you have a script it should take care in the future if a newer
> ConfigurationOfXXX is either
> - in sqS/MetacelloRepository
> - or the projects own directory
>
> Regarding version numbers: I would vote for two digits - Major and minor
> version.
for me I do not care. I just want something that I can understand. and 1.0.2
for going from something that does not work
to something that does is not sometihng I can remember.
> So usually you start with 0.1, then 0.2, 0.3, ...
>
> When you make a patch to an old (problematic) version then you branch
> with a patch number. So for instance 0.2.1 means it is the first patch
> for Version 0.2.
>
>
> Bye
Bye ;)
> T.
>
>
>
>
