Publishing on Monticello
Martin Wirblat
sql.mawi at t-link.de
Fri Sep 16 22:44:37 UTC 2005
Bert Freudenberg wrote:
..
> If it is only one method, a .mcd relative to the "official" version is
> very small.
But you still need the package against which the .mcd goes for loading
it, no?
>> For private use this may not look much different. For instance, I am
>> regularly "fixing some inflexibilities of the official image" before
>> I use it, by overriding some things of the UI and perhaps other
>> things. Is that better done by creating some big modified versions of
>> original packages just because of a few changed methods? When the
>> next image - or worse the next interim update - comes out, I would
>> have to sort out my few changes from the possibly many official
>> changes applied to the package in the meantime.
>
>
> Monticello is designed to allow precisely this style of development.
> You just merge your version with the official version and you're done.
> As a developer you should of course enable the #upgradeIsMerge preference.
>
Would it extract the methods I am going to override, that have changed
since I replaced them originally?
>> As long as you are developing a master image, it is the right way to
>> create modified versions of original packages. They immediately
>> become the new originals;) This kind of work is wonderfully supported
>> by Monticello with its many merging facilities. Nonetheless, if you
>> want to develop a second master *partly* synchronized with another
>> master line, there will be much work waiting for you, accumulating
>> over time...
>
>
> This is a false assertion. Did you actually try? I regularily have
> private changes to "official" packages. Upgrading them works great.
>
No, I didn't try it. Impara seems to try.
>> For all other purposes that want to derive from a master but want to
>> develop with the master (and that is the standard case), some sort of
>> "delta functionality" is needed. This delta should be as smoothly as
>> possible addable to the next version of the master, because this work
>> has to be done manifold (by the millions of the future, that are
>> going to use Squeak:)
>
>
> Like .mcd?
>
Like being able to get (only) the hot spot methods presented, the
overrides whose originals changed in the meantime, so that they are now
not overriding anymore what they did when being programmed. Moreover I
would like to have only one "delta-package" for one official release and
not many mcd-files which I would to have handle one by one.
>> Monticello seems to me not being so well suited for this task. Either
>> it should be accompanied by a module system like the one of Henrik,
>> or perhaps it is sufficient that it will be extended with this delta
>> functionality.
>
>
> It seems to me you're just not comfortable using Monticello, yet. This
> may point out an interface problem. I'm open to suggestions (or even
> better, code).
>
Yes, there is an interface problem. It starts with the bubble help
repeating what the buttons "merge" and "load" themselves say.
Unfortunately I don't know exactly what "load" and "merge" means, so I
can't send you code ;)
Regards,
Martin
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|