On 26 February 2013 20:48, Esteban A. Maringolo <emaring...@gmail.com> wrote: > 2013/2/26 Frank Shearar <frank.shea...@gmail.com>: >> On 26 February 2013 20:07, stephane ducasse <stephane.duca...@free.fr> wrote: >>> There is no magic if as a programmer we do not define the dependencies we >>> cannot do anything. ;) >>> so we should define configurationOf and we will take real advantages of >>> them. > >> Nowadays with CI and all sorts of stuff we're (Pharo _and_ Squeak, I >> mean) in a much better place. There's still the modularity aspect to >> worry about in the general case, but CI can still help out a bit >> there, flushing out incompatible monkey patches. > > But the thing still is how to manage the dependencies without screwing > the whole image. > And so far, as Stephane said, the ConfigurationOf* is the only "safe" > (and viable?) way to do it. > > Dependency management is not a simple problem, but succeeding at it > would be a key differentiator.
I know. You're right. I'm not saying anything different. Well, except for the differentiator part. The problem's pretty much solved in quite a few other languages. (Clojars can do this: https://clojars.org/cloverage. Rubygems doesn't, but it could, thanks to bundler.) SqueakMap's sole purpose is this: how do you FIND the ConfigurationOf? How do you know who to contact? What's the thing for, in the first place? And I'd argue that ss3 is not that catalog. (And that's before we talk about availability of services.) frank
