bernhard at pieber.com
Fri Aug 1 00:24:01 UTC 2003
Avi Bryant <avi at beta4.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 1 Aug 2003, Bernhard Pieber wrote:
> > Ned Konz <ned at bike-nomad.com> wrote:
> > > The problem with this is that you may be removing extension methods
> > > that replaced existing methods in the system.
> > >
> > > What you probably want to do is to revert them, but we don't have
> > > enough context to tell which version you'd want to revert them to. If
> > > you could tell that a certain version came from a given package or
> > > package version, that would be easier.
> > How about an intermediate solution? Envy uses it and IMHO it works quite
> > well.
> That's a good approach to remember. It will only work once we have the
> entire image packaged, however, instead of the situation right now where
> the vast majority of the code isn't in any package at all.
Wow, that was fast. I got the answer at the same time when my posting
Ah, right! I forgot that there is code which is not in a package. How
Hmm, wouldn't it be easy to convert the existing system categories to
Monticello packages. Then you could just reload any of them in case you
needed. I have to think about that. Probably I am again forgetting
something very basic. It's been a long day.
More information about the Squeak-dev