Monticello status

Avi Bryant avi at
Mon Apr 7 07:42:11 UTC 2003

On Mon, 7 Apr 2003, Stephane Ducasse wrote:

> Great colin so we should work together (even if I have to finish other
> stuff). I think that the first step would be to have a declarative model
> for Squeak covering ClassVariable, PoolVariable, Global in particular.

Explicitly modelling instance variables would also be useful, at least
from a versioning standpoint.  You'll notice that in your snippet of
declarative specification you have InstanceVariable as a separate
declaration, whereas in mine (for now) inst vars are part of the class
declaration.  Among other things, this doesn't merge properly (if Colin
and I concurrently add an inst var to the same class, the conflict would
have to be manually resolved).

The hard part here is that if variables (class, pool, instance) are
treated separately from their class declaration, they can be in different
packages - and currently in Squeak there's no way to mark that (for
methods we can abuse method categories, but no equivalent metadata exists
for variables).

If anyone has a brilliant suggestion of how to resolve this with minimal
changes to the kernel, I'll be delighted to modify PackageInfo and
Monticello to suit.


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list