Dale Can we use an old version of Metacello that we maintain? Then we migrate when needed and this is ok.
Stef > | > What I'd _like_ to do for Metacello and Pharo-2.0 is to make the > | > changes against the MetacelloPreview release, which I'm managing > | > on github. > | > > | > The MetacelloPreview is aimed at an eventual 1.0 release of > | > Metacello (hopefully in the fall). > | > > | > I would _like_ Metacello-Base to be included in the Pharo-2.0 base > | > image, the sooner the better and I'm poised to pull the trigger on > | > that, but the recent changes have crippled FileTree ... > | > > | yeah.. we talking about it all the time "how good it would be to have > | metacello preloaded in image" :) > | > | > So until FileTree is functional again, I can't really do anything > | > with Pharo-2.0... > | > > | > Hacking Metacello to get it running on Pharo-2.0 doesn't help _me_ > | > move forward. > | > > | > | You can tell how they could help, so they will (if they will still > | want), leaving less work for you :) Of course, if you need help or > | can > | see where it can be useful. > | But i know it is hard to coordinate & organize activities.. sometimes > | harder than doing everything alone. :) > > The bigger problem is that I have to have a code base that runs on multiple > platforms while being maintainable, so a "port" to Pharo-2.0 is only a > starting point. In the case of FileTree, which is the real bottleneck there's > a lot code that is written against the FileDirectory API, so there will need > to be significant work to find a way to keep a common code base .... a much > tougher problem, than "just getting it working", it can be solved with time, > but I didn't budget time for an emergency rewrite of FileTree ... today. > > | > | > It is likely that I will have to redo whatever hacks that are done > | > to get it running on Pharo-2.0 to be compatible with the rest of > | > platforms that I am supporting and doing it right takes a little > | > more effort ... > | > > | yes.. it is hard to keep up with moving target.. But i hope this is > | for good of us all (FileSystem ,as to me, is no doubt much better > | comparing to what we had before). > > Oh don't get me wrong, I agree with the overall goals ... I actually think > that renaming FileDirectory to ObsoleteFileDirectory (and keeping the > implementation) would be a good compromise ... I can easily switch class > names for the short term which then buys me time for doing a proper rewrite > ... > > | > | > So if you are just going to hack around to get things running on > | > Pharo-2.0 I guess I would have to say that I don't care what you > | > do, because the hacks don't make my job any easier. > | > > | > Dale > | > > | > | -- > | Best regards, > | Igor Stasenko. > | _______________________________________________ > | seaside mailing list > | [email protected] > | http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/seaside > | >
