fstephany wrote > > What if you only need the bug fix in the Pharo version and not the > Squeak one? The package becomes 1.3.1 in Squeak but is identical to > 1.3.0. No big deal I guess... > Well, we're versioning the *project* i.e. the config, not the package, so I don't think there's a conflict.
fstephany wrote > > My main concern at the moment is that a MetacelloConfig is always > modifiable. It is tempting to fix a version that is already distributed > and thus confuse everyone. > Yes, this would be a big problem and violates the spirit of Metacello. Just as bad is the fact that Metacello configs are copied all over the place. Is the ConfigurationOf that I download from SqS/projectName the same one as SqS/MetacelloRepository the same as SqS/WhateverForPharo1.4... IMO it's absolutely essential to have one master, and read-only copies everywhere elsewhere. fstephany wrote > > We can maybe imagine something à la Ruby gems? > That would be awesome!!! Metacello is sooo young and we've already had so much progress. I'm sure that won't be far off... -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Semantic-Versioning-tp4630055p4630164.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
