El mié, 04-08-2010 a las 11:49 +0200, Stéphane Ducasse escribió: > Yes! > Good push > now I understand what you meant with Universe. > > Now two important comments for me: > > The problem One is that we are creating another vocabulary > - Why not sticking with MetacelloRepositoryForPharo10?
I have no problem with changing name. I think though that MetacelloRepositoryForPharo10 is very long but as the tools hide it maybe isn't a big problem either. Lets vote and if so, change it as soon as possible. > Like that we will not have to explain an Universe is a metacello > repository..... > > Second point: what I would like is to have that all the dependent packages > and configurations are copied into the metacelloRepository. > I do not want to have dependency to any external servers. This way we will > self-contained distribution. > Do you handle that? I have read the discussions and yes that would be good but some things concern me: - Repository size (maybe this is not a problem but the squeak source downtime come to mind) - Load in the squeak source when sync is being done. - Who syncs the packages, Metacello when uploading¡ Some webmaster? A cron? - What about conflicting names in packages. - Maybe RFB-MiguelCoba.25 in ConfigurationOfRFB ask it from lukas repo and ConfigurationOfOtherPackage requires RFB-MiguelCoba.25 from squeaksource RFB repository and for any reason the packages are distinct (maybe a bug was found and republished in lukas repo with the same version number, but squeaksource version was copied before the fix was done) Maybe those problems never show. Anyway, the idea of having all available is good, but maybe not a task of Metacello, but as an independent effort. Metacello will just use the redundant repositories when installing a package. Cheers > > Else this is great. > > Stef > > > On Aug 4, 2010, at 11:41 AM, Adrian Lienhard wrote: > > > Hi Miguel, > > > > Thanks! It's great to see progress on this front! > > > > Cheers, > > Adrian > > > > On Aug 4, 2010, at 10:21 , Miguel Enrique Cobá Martínez wrote: > > > >> Hi all, > >> > >> I have created three new repositories on squeaksource: > >> > >> http://www.squeaksource.com/UniverseForPharo10 > >> http://www.squeaksource.com/UniverseForPharo11 > >> http://www.squeaksource.com/UniverseForPharo12 > >> > >> They are the repositories for the current versions of Pharo. The idea is > >> that each new release add a new UniverseForXXX repository and populates > >> it with the current UniverseForXXX packages of the stable release. > >> > >> Right now they are mostly empty, but should be populated by the > >> community and the ConfigurationOfXXX maintainers. > >> > >> Most ConfigurationOfXXX packages in > >> > >> http://www.squeaksource.com/MetacelloRepository > >> > >> should be copied to UniverseForPharo10. Which versions? The last known > >> version that is working correctly on Pharo 1.0. This will be the > >> official universe for Pharo1.0. No ConfigurationOfXXX should be stored > >> on UniverseForPharo10 if it is not working correctly on Pharo10. > >> > >> Then two things can follow: > >> > >> - If the package already has ConfigurationOfXXX package versions that > >> work in Pharo 1.1, those versions should be copied to > >> UniverseForPharo11. > >> > >> - If the ConfigurationOfXXX only works for Pharo1.0 and the maintainer > >> want to create the configuration for Pharo 1.1, he/she must copy the > >> last working configuration for the package from UniverseForPharo10 to > >> UniverseForPharo11. There he/she can start modifying the package until > >> it works correctly in Pharo1.1 (use the blessing: tags wisely to avoid > >> marking a broken configuration as released) > >> > >> This will permit to populate the UniverseForPharo11 based on the last > >> working package versions from UniverseForPharo10. From that point they > >> will likely diverge because of maintenance releases to the packages in > >> any UniverseForXXX repository. > >> > >> The same will must be done to migrate from UniverseForPharo11 to > >> UniverseForPharo12. You get the idea. > >> > >> With time, MetacelloRepository should be deprecated in favor of this > >> UniverseForXXX repositories. > >> > >> Anyone is free to copy a working version from a previous Universe to a > >> new Universe. They have read/write permissions to all. > >> > >> This setup will avoid the problems we are having right now with the > >> in-image changes that are rendering the ConfigurationOfXXX unusable in > >> distinct releases of Pharo. > >> > >> What this means to the end user: > >> > >> - For released version of Pharo > >> > >> They will have to use gofer this way: > >> > >> Gofer new > >> squeaksource: 'UniverseForPharo10'; "Or UniverseForPharo11" > >> project: 'ConfigurationOfMagma'; > >> load. > >> ConfigurationOfMagma project latestVersion load. > >> > >> - For next releases of Pharo > >> > >> Gofer loadFromUniverse: 'Magma'. "Or with GoferProjectLoader" > >> ConfigurationOfMagma project latestVersion load. > >> > >> All this depends on conventions to find the appropriate universe for > >> each pharo release, and also in the support from tools (like gofer in > >> this example or the GoferProjectLoader if it is part of the core image). > >> The universe functionality of the tools right now rely on the > >> SystemVersion current majorMinorVersion string for deciding which > >> repository to connect to. This could be improved surely but for now it > >> works. > >> > >> I'm loading a new version of Gofer to PharoInbox with this functionality > >> added so if you want to load directly from the universes with gofer do: > >> > >> Gofer upgrade. > >> Gofer loadFromUniverse: 'YourPackageAlreadyInAUniverse'. > >> > >> But wait to this change to be treated by Stephane or Lukas before > >> attempt it. > >> > >> Right now there is only Magma in the three repositories, but it > >> shouldn't be hard for the maintainers of the other Configurations to > >> help populate the universes from Pharo1.0, Pharo1.1 and Pharo1.2. > >> > >> This will benefit us as a community because the universes for the > >> released pharo versions will be mostly untouched (only maintenance > >> releases) and people will have the freedom to modify the configuration > >> in the unstable (currently UniverseForPharo12) universe without > >> affecting the users of the stable versions. > >> > >> Also, this will avoid to have a lot of conditionals inside the > >> ConfigurationOfXXX classes, because a given class will target a specific > >> Pharo release (the version on the newest universes could even delete the > >> methods for the old universe, because will likely won't work in the new > >> universe, deleting unnecessary and legacy code from the configuration) > >> > >> Comments and improvements welcome > >> > >> -- > >> Miguel Cobá > >> http://miguel.leugim.com.mx > >> > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Pharo-project mailing list > >> Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr > >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Pharo-project mailing list > > Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr > > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project -- Miguel Cobá http://miguel.leugim.com.mx _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
