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
|