Do you know why?
I thought that they would be the first candidates for 3.10
Ralph?

Stef



On 2 mai 07, at 09:11, Pavel Krivanek wrote:

> They weren't
> -- Pavel
>
> On 5/1/07, stephane ducasse <stephane.ducasse at free.fr> wrote:
>> By the way do you know if you changes have been harvested in 3.10?
>>
>> Stef
>>
>> On 29 avr. 07, at 16:21, Pavel Krivanek wrote:
>>
>> >>
>> >> On 28 avr. 07, at 15:17, Pavel Krivanek wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Hi all,
>> >> >
>> >> > I have prepared the new version of the KernelImage. The most
>> >> important
>> >> > new is the independence of the MinimalMorphic package. That
>> >> means that
>> >> > MinimalMorphic package has no overrides now and we are be  
>> able to
>> >> > modify and publish Kernel and basic primitive packages directly
>> >> from
>> >> > the MinimalMorphic image!
>> >> >
>> >> > I have to say that some of the secessary refactorings are  
>> very ugly
>> >> > now but the main goal was to make the MinimalMorphic independent
>> >> soon
>> >> > and enable to develop the kernel refactorings in more
>> >> comfortable way.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Can you give some example of these ugly refactorings??
>> >
>> > In some cases I created more general class that contains "kernel"
>> > implementation. The Morphic then simply adds its override (now  
>> in the
>> > class hierarchy meaning) to the original class. Such example is the
>> > BasicChangeSet class.
>> >
>> > Then I created methods like specificOperation1: in the Object
>> > interface. When the Kernel calls it, it does nothing. Morphic  
>> adds its
>> > implementation of this general method. It's about in 24 cases.
>> >
>> > I hope that we will be able to replace it with better and more  
>> general
>> > refactorings soon.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > -- Pavel
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>>
>
>