----- Original Message ----- | From: "Camillo Bruni" <camillobr...@gmail.com> | To: Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr | Sent: Tuesday, April 16, 2013 3:19:57 PM | Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Metacello configuration conventions | | I liked ruby-gems approach more than the one in Metacello. You usually | specify | a major version (as under linux) for your dependency. That means the | dependency | might evolve a bit, typically for bugfixes, without you having to update | the configuration manually. | | http://docs.rubygems.org/read/chapter/16 for me is what I'd like to see. | | As you say, #stable and #development are mostly for humans.
Cami, I did look at the way ruby-gems worked pretty early on in Metacello development and I've arranged things such that I should be able to add the ability to specify ranges of versions, but the whole mechanics of the ruby-gem universe is different than the smalltalk universe so I'm not sure that Metacello would give you the behavior you are looking for even I did allow version ranges to be specified ... I'd be willing to spend time working through use cases with you to see if there would be benefit for enabling that feature... Dale
