On 13 February 2013 16:03, stephane ducasse <stephane.duca...@free.fr> wrote: > > On Feb 13, 2013, at 4:06 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <s...@clipperadams.com> wrote: > >> stephane ducasse wrote >>> @sean what was the problem because I tested it several time on 1.4 and 2.0 >> >> The tests were failing due to FS differences between 1.4 and 2.0. I uploaded >> fixes, so we could do a 4.5.1 with the latest packages (4.5 is tagged >> release so we shouldn't change it). Also, I moved the dependency on the >> CommandShell version from the baseline (where I originally put it in error), >> to the versions. > > Nobody use this 4.5 so we could just modify it. Because 4.5.1 looks boring to > me.
As a general rule this is a very bad idea. The version number should allow you to say with certainty what's in an artifact. Just modifying it means that "4.5" tells you just about nothing about someone's setup when they say "4.5 is broken". frank >> For CommandShell, I moved CommandShellPharo into a #'pharo' block, and MVC >> into a #'squeak' one. >> >> >> >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://forum.world.st/The-monkey-is-back-in-town-tp4658091p4669672.html >> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. >> > >
