Indeed, we moved Moose from Pharo 1.0 to Pharo 1.1 in a couple of hours, and 
everything worked out perfectly. The coolest thing was that simply moving from 
one Pharo to the other basically improved the product performance with about 
40% :).

So, even from the point of view of a large project, change is not a problem. In 
fact, it is wanted.

Addressing the question of how one should upgrade the code without changing the 
image ... I will say that at this point I do not want that. I want to be able 
to load my code in a new image at any time. So, from my point of view, I will 
upgrade my image by simply loading the code in the new image.

Cheers,
Doru


On 9 Sep 2010, at 22:27, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:

>>> Why are you so aggressive against us?
>> 
>> I didn't mean to be aggressive, I just don't think your idea will work well.
> 
> we will see. 
> 
>>> Now if you want status quo why do you even commit in squeak?
>> 
>> I'm not against changes.
> 
> So I did not understand. Probably my english.
> 
>>> Pharo1.0 is not abandoned at all. Since 1.0 we got more than 1000 bugs 
>>> closed.
>>> The versions are just a way to have milestones. Now there is no problem you 
>>> think otherwise
>> 
>> So if I have a Pharo 1.0 image with my code and I don't want to rebuild the 
>> image, then how can I update it to 1.1?
> 
> - first I cannot reload code for you.
> - second you can simply look at Utilities and find the right invocation to 
> get the next update
> stream. 
> 
>       Something like that 
>               Utilities readServer: Utilities serverUrls updatesThrough: nil 
> saveLocally: true updateImage: true.
>               But you should set the version to 1.1. 
> 
> I'm sure that you can easily find how to do it. 
> 
>       Of course in 1.2 this is way nicer
>               UpdateStreamer new beVerbose; updateFromServer
> 
> Then there are changes like closures that requires a brand new image so you 
> cannot 
> bash us if you cannot reload you code in another image.
> Moose people have a lot of packages with a lot of dependencies and code and 
> they moved from 1.0 to 1.1
> without any real problem. Probably a couple of deprecated messages. 
>       
> Stef
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

--
www.tudorgirba.com

"It's not what we do that matters most, it's how we do it."


_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

Reply via email to