Feeding the update stream

Daniel Vainsencher danielv at techunix.technion.ac.il
Tue Jun 28 19:08:17 UTC 2005

Bert Freudenberg wrote:
> Am 28.06.2005 um 18:55 schrieb Daniel Vainsencher:
[inclusion queue as a source.sqf.org project]
> Not a bad idea. Maybe call it "3.9 Patches" or "Submissions"?  However, 
> it could get cluttered very easily.
I'm not sure whether its good or bad to have a single project across 
versions. Some differences are:
-We will meet some scalability issues about as fast as possible. (will 
force our tools to get faster)
-Things that didn't get in last time are still there (better than moving 
things manually, but we will need some way of ignoring the irrelevant).

>> Then whatever tools get coded for improving awareness of new code  in 
>> an MC repository automatically apply to the harvesting process.
> That's a good point. The SqueakSource server could be extended by  
> adding search facilities, bug reporting, etc ... and then have an in- 
> Squeak MC-based client to manage them. MCBFAV anyone?
Seems like the only thing the BFAV used to have over what we'd get 
immediately is the fact that the BFAV would hold bugs/code/reviews in 
the same place, same UI, in Squeak.

Since we've given up on the integration anyway with the move to Mantis, 
I think we lose nothing by implementing this with the tool support that 
currently exists, and then let it get better with time. But we better 
have a good plan for integration with/migration from Mantis, or some 
good people will kill us ;-)

A side benefit is that it is a way to help the remaining few 
dev-Squeakers who haven't already, meet MC/SqS.


More information about the Packages mailing list