On Mar 3, 2004, at 12:16 PM, Andreas Raab wrote:

>> No, I think we should explicitly include instructions in the update
>> stream to pull in specific new versions from SM.  That way you'll
>> always get the right version for the update level you are at, and 
>> it'll
>> always come at the right point in the stream.  If you just always pull
>> in the latest version you're bound to run into trouble (particularly 
>> if
>> you're updating an image that hasn't been updated for a while).
>
> I don't buy this argument. Mostly because there's not much of a 
> difference
> between the updates and packages. Just as food for thought ... what 
> would be
> if we define "image version" in a similar form that we define MC 
> package
> versions? If we did, then we *should* be able to declare an appropriate
> dependency, shouldn't we?

This sounds reasonable, but I'm fuzzy on the details.  Where do we 
declare this dependency?  How does the image get to know about it 
during the update process?  What triggers the process of trying to 
fulfill the dependencies?  Etc.

I'm definitely anticipating the time when there's an Image package on 
SqueakMap and you can just load the release you want.  But we do have 
some things to work out before then.