Update stream loading from SM/Monticello (was Re: [FIX]
SUnit-combined-md)
Marcus Denker
marcus at ira.uka.de
Wed Feb 11 20:36:44 UTC 2004
Am 11.02.2004 um 21:10 schrieb Doug Way:
> goran.krampe at bluefish.se wrote:
>
>> Hehe, that is also true - we need to issue an update that installs
>> SM2.
>> That would essentially be the same as running the "SqueakMap"
>> loadscript
>> - but not *exactly*, because it opens a package loader at the end.
>>
>> I can look it over and produce a new one as a .cs with a postscript
>> later today.
>>
>
>
> The same issue applies to the rest of this thread... whether we want
> to be loading SUnit as a Monticello package from SM. (It would be
> loading from SM, right? Or would it be SqueakSource or something
> else?)
I cleaned up the mess of Sunit entries on SqueakMap: Now there's only
one (SUnit). But this points to SqueakSource for now. I
can change that. I need to try the new "release from monticello"
feature: Does this store the .mcz directly on SqueakMap?
> Adding the Monticello installer in Basic is another issue which
> Michael & others posted about before. I'm personally fine with adding
> it. That may make Monticello a defacto standard and it may viral
> itself into a lot of code, but the same is true of changesets, and if
> MC is a good addition/successor to the changeset format, maybe that's
> a good thing. (Life would be pretty difficult if we insisted on not
> having ChangeSets or anything else as a standard, for example. :-) )
> I'm still not totally clear on where the dividing line between MC and
> PackageInfo is, I need to play around with MC more. But it sounds
> like we want the fuller capabilities of MC.
>
I need to think about this some more...
Marcus
--
Marcus Denker marcus at ira.uka.de
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|