Using Monticello and SqueakSource and distributing packages

Avi Bryant avi at beta4.com
Tue Feb 17 22:24:22 UTC 2004


On Feb 17, 2004, at 2:14 PM, Timothy Rowledge wrote:

>
> On Feb 17, 2004, at 1:08 PM, Avi Bryant wrote:
>
>> It's not a full history of development - it's a snapshot of the code 
>> at a single point in time, with a UUID identifying that snapshot, and 
>> a record of the UUIDs of all the previous snapshots it's descended 
>> from.  So it's a great thing to distribute, IMO.
> Ah, so. I've learnt something useful and we're making a start at 
> documentation. Previously I had the impression that the files were 
> accretive repositories and had the whole lot in there.

Good.  Keep asking questions and we'll keep answering them.  Hopefully 
someone will record the whole lot.

> A micro-package with Object>touch that is a prerequisite for the main 
> one would presumably be one way to handle this. Or indeed putting the 
> #noteCompilation.. in a package that gets loaded after the main one.

Sure, either of those would work.  Somewhere on my TODO list is a way 
to bundle up a package with all of its prereqs into a single SAR file 
so that such things are easy to distribute.  If anyone wants to 
contribute code to do this (it shouldn't be that hard) I will integrate 
it immediately.

>  Or.... you mention that the mcz includes a fileout - so can a normal 
> changeset preamble/postscript be used?

No, not really - or at least, MC would have to be extended to know 
about this and deal with them properly when it parses/merges/etc the 
definitions in the fileout.  I use class side #initialize methods to do 
postscript-type stuff, which seems to work ok.




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list