On Jun 16, 2012, at 12:57 AM, Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote: > But if I'm building a new image *today*, I want it to do the right thing now > (automatically for the current version), with the same incantation as worked > months ago or months from now.
Bill when do you take the time to have a look at Metacello. Why people like me are spending days on writing 45 pages of documentation to hear you saying that. This scenario is supported since months nearly since Barcelona 2010. > If we can't do that, the config browser is pretty much a dream vs. reality. > > > > ________________________________________ > From: pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr > [pharo-project-boun...@lists.gforge.inria.fr] on behalf of Sean P. DeNigris > [s...@clipperadams.com] > Sent: Friday, June 15, 2012 2:49 PM > To: pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr > Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] start thinking on summer release of Pharo 1.4 > > Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote >> >> My gripe is... that configs... work (very) differently over time >> > With the current evolution of Metacello, this should not be the case. Done > right, what a config loads can be 100% static and repeatable. If you load a > literal version (e.g. '1.4'), which loads literal versions of dependent > projects (which they should unless there is a reason not to, e.g. a loose > dependency like Seaside on OB), which load literal versions all the way > down, it will do the same thing today, tomorrow, and ten years from now. > > The only hill to climb now is getting the word out about Metacello > conventions/best practices. > > > Schwab,Wilhelm K wrote >> >> If pre-loading, how about FFI? >> > I think "easily loadable" is the correct state, not included by default. > > -- > View this message in context: > http://forum.world.st/start-thinking-on-summer-release-of-Pharo-1-4-tp4634589p4635009.html > Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > >
