On 04/25/2017 08:09 AM, Thierry Goubier wrote:
2017-04-25 16:11 GMT+02:00 Dale Henrichs
>:
[ Shortened for brevity ... ]
Hum. I'm not trying to determine a version for the
configurations present
2017-04-25 16:11 GMT+02:00 Dale Henrichs :
[ Shortened for brevity ... ]
>
>>>
>> Hum. I'm not trying to determine a version for the configurations present
>> in the image... and #primeRegistryFromImage seems to, and then I seem to
>> get errors because it
On 4/24/17 9:40 PM, Thierry Goubier wrote:
Hi Dale,
Le 25/04/2017 à 00:02, Dale Henrichs a écrit :
On 04/24/2017 01:49 PM, Thierry Goubier wrote:
Le 17/04/2017 à 22:13, Dale Henrichs a écrit :
On 04/17/2017 12:47 PM, Thierry Goubier wrote:
Hi Dale,
Le 17/04/2017 à 21:05, Dale
Hi Dale,
Le 25/04/2017 à 00:02, Dale Henrichs a écrit :
On 04/24/2017 01:49 PM, Thierry Goubier wrote:
Le 17/04/2017 à 22:13, Dale Henrichs a écrit :
On 04/17/2017 12:47 PM, Thierry Goubier wrote:
Hi Dale,
Le 17/04/2017 à 21:05, Dale Henrichs a écrit :
I would think that a `project
On 04/24/2017 01:49 PM, Thierry Goubier wrote:
Le 17/04/2017 à 22:13, Dale Henrichs a écrit :
On 04/17/2017 12:47 PM, Thierry Goubier wrote:
Hi Dale,
Le 17/04/2017 à 21:05, Dale Henrichs a écrit :
I would think that a `project list` view that made the Metacello
project
registration
On 04/24/2017 01:49 PM, Thierry Goubier wrote:
Le 17/04/2017 à 22:13, Dale Henrichs a écrit :
On 04/17/2017 12:47 PM, Thierry Goubier wrote:
Hi Dale,
Le 17/04/2017 à 21:05, Dale Henrichs a écrit :
I would think that a `project list` view that made the Metacello
project
registration
Le 17/04/2017 à 22:13, Dale Henrichs a écrit :
On 04/17/2017 12:47 PM, Thierry Goubier wrote:
Hi Dale,
Le 17/04/2017 à 21:05, Dale Henrichs a écrit :
I would think that a `project list` view that made the Metacello project
registration visible would help developers keep things straight.
It
On 04/17/2017 12:47 PM, Thierry Goubier wrote:
Hi Dale,
Le 17/04/2017 à 21:05, Dale Henrichs a écrit :
I would think that a `project list` view that made the Metacello project
registration visible would help developers keep things straight.
It seems that the issue here is that developers
Hi Dale,
Le 17/04/2017 à 21:05, Dale Henrichs a écrit :
I would think that a `project list` view that made the Metacello project
registration visible would help developers keep things straight.
It seems that the issue here is that developers can't tell what projects
are already loaded in the
I would think that a `project list` view that made the Metacello project
registration visible would help developers keep things straight.
It seems that the issue here is that developers can't tell what projects
are already loaded in the current image and also cannot tell what
version of the
Ephestos is my project that is a single configuration that unites all my
other projects under one roof. Ephestos loads 1) Nireas 2) ChronosManager
3) SmaCC (not mine) 4) Atlas 5) CPP 6) Octopus 7) BPY 8) Orpheas . Each one
of them a separate git repo with its own baseline. Some of them depend on
On 16/04/17 16:14, Dimitris Chloupis wrote:
Just for the record the easiest way to load packages in the image the
Package Browser relies solely on configurations . Is there a plan to
migrate because as much I am vocal supporter of Pharo moving to git it
will be a big lose if Package Browser is
On 16/04/2017 08:54, Tudor Girba wrote:
> However, Configurations are useful in offering people a way to understand how
> the code is organized. For example, in Moose we have the inspector extension
> that shows the dependencies and it is very valuable.
>
> The only thing we need is to
Just for the record the easiest way to load packages in the image the
Package Browser relies solely on configurations . Is there a plan to
migrate because as much I am vocal supporter of Pharo moving to git it will
be a big lose if Package Browser is not ported .
On Sun, 16 Apr 2017 at 09:55,
However, Configurations are useful in offering people a way to understand how
the code is organized. For example, in Moose we have the inspector extension
that shows the dependencies and it is very valuable.
The only thing we need is to Metacello to be able to load new versions of the
Of course. But, that will only be applicable to people using Pharo 7 and
beyond. For people using Pharo 6, they will still rely on how the code was
packaged for that release. Or did I miss something?
Doru
> On Apr 15, 2017, at 11:11 PM, Alexandre Bergel
> wrote:
>
2017-04-14 14:20 GMT+02:00 Andrei Chis :
>
>
> On Apr 14, 2017 14:13, "Pavel Krivanek" wrote:
>
>
>
> 2017-04-14 12:52 GMT+02:00 Andrei Chis :
>
>> Isn't it a bit too late for such a change? Might break projects
On Apr 14, 2017 14:13, "Pavel Krivanek" wrote:
2017-04-14 12:52 GMT+02:00 Andrei Chis :
> Isn't it a bit too late for such a change? Might break projects that
> expect configurations to be present.
>
I do not think so. We do not have
2017-04-14 12:52 GMT+02:00 Andrei Chis :
> Isn't it a bit too late for such a change? Might break projects that
> expect configurations to be present.
>
I do not think so. We do not have configurations for the system itself
(well, we have them in an external
On Apr 14, 2017 13:55, "Cyril Ferlicot D." wrote:
On 14/04/2017 12:52, Andrei Chis wrote:
> Isn't it a bit too late for such a change? Might break projects that
> expect configurations to be present.
>
Is there such projects?
I know some that use the GT related ones.
Isn't it a bit too late for such a change? Might break projects that expect
configurations to be present.
Cheers,
Andrei
On Fri, Apr 14, 2017 at 1:07 PM, Pavel Krivanek
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> in Pharo 7 all configurations will be removed and replaced with the
> baselines.
21 matches
Mail list logo