Publishing on Monticello

Martin Wirblat sql.mawi at t-link.de
Sun Sep 18 21:49:57 UTC 2005


Avi Bryant wrote:

> 
> I think this is a documentation issue rather than an implementation  
> one.  It sounds to me like what you're describing someone having to  do 
> manually is precisely what Monticello's merging is designed to  
> automate: checking for concurrent and thus conflicting changes to the  
> same methods. If "the old and new overridden method are [not] the  
> same", then the MC merge browser will display that change in bold,  and 
> force you to resolve the conflict.
> 

All right, such strong resistance to understand what I mean really
perplexed me. It dawned on me that I overlooked something ;) My opinion
about this missing feature stems from the time when the image was not
"packagized" and it thus was impossible to make additions or changes to
the whole image by making diffs to existing packages. So I only had in
mind merging a package over no or a different package. For example I
have a single Change.mcz for all overrides in all classes, sort of the
delta package. In that case the problem is what I described, MC will not
help me. But if I make the overrides being part of the original packages
- my private versions - you and Bert are right, Monticello finds the
conflicting methods.

Apologies, Bert!

One problem seems to remain. If a method gets intermediately overridden
and put into another package, MC seems not to be able to detect it as
conflicting.

Regards,
Martin






More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list