On Sun, Feb 12, 2017 at 11:36 PM, Dale Henrichs < [email protected]> wrote:
> Peter, > > <wishful thinking> > > In the long term the the MetaRepo should be replaced by a repository of > project specification objects (like this [1]). Each project specification > would contain the meta data for a project (like this[2]) instead of a copy > of a ConfigurationOf that is almost always out-of-date. > > ConfigurationOf should really be phased out -- they've been obsolete for > 3-4 years now... BaselineOf is preferred. > Does BaselineOf work with Monticello? I thought it was only for use with git. cheers -ben > > If folks are using something like git/github, with proper branching, then > a BaselineOf wouldn't be published on the master branch until the unit > tests are passing (travis-ci). > > </wishful thinking> > > Dale > > [1] https://github.com/GsDevKit/GsDevKit_home/tree/gh-pages > [2] https://github.com/GsDevKit/GsDevKit_home/blob/gh-pages/Seaside3.ston > > On 2/12/17 4:03 AM, Peter Uhnak wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> would it make sense to take configurations from metarepos instead >> directly from the source? >> >> And more imporantly: would be considered bad practice for users to do it >> right now? >> >> E.g. >> >> spec >> project: 'Magritte' >> with: [ spec >> className: #ConfigurationOfMagritte3; >> versionString: #stable; >> repository: 'http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Ph >> aro/MetaRepoForPharo50/main/' ]. >> >> v. repository: 'http://smalltalkhub.com/mc/Magritte/Magritte3/main/' >> >> >> pros: >> * the (e.g. Magritte) developer can freely change platforms >> * the ConfigurationOf could differ between various MetaRepo versions >> (combined with git it could reduce their complexity) >> * users do not have to think about where is the canonical repo (I've seen >> project that had copies on SS, STHub, GitHub, and a custom location -_-) >> >> cons: >> * the ConfigurationOf could differ between various MetaRepo versions (if >> the code is compatible, then two repos have to be updated >> >> Any thoughts? >> >> Peter >> >> > >
