On 9 janv. 08, at 17:52, Norbert Hartl wrote:

>
> On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 11:41 -0300, Bergel, Alexandre wrote:
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I am wondering whether some of you use dependencies in Monticello?
>> Are you happy with it?
>> Seaside on Monticello does not seem to make use of them... Is there a
>> reason why ?
>>
>> I think that Damien is using them...
>>
> I used it for a while. But they were very annoying when applied
> to certain packages. If you use two packages which need a third
> package together you are in trouble. It is too easy to downgrade
> a dependent package without noticing.
>
> After that I went to an empty top package which has dependencies
> to each of the packages it needs. This works quite well but is
> annoying, too. If you are deploying based on such a top package
> you are forced to save a new top package version whenever one
> of the dependent package changes.
>
> I wanted to use MonticelloConfigurations but there is no support
> for having directories as repositories (but I got a patch for
> it). But this looks like a good approach.
>
> Nowadays I do not use any monticello dependencies. For deployment
> I hardcode the versions into a Installer script.


Beside some of the above mentionned issues, I also faced another one  
when developping MetaclassTalk.
I do change class definitions by introducing new metaclasses so I  
needed extending Monticello to load MetaclassTalk. Having a dependency  
on a package that modifies Monticello doesnot work. So, I used an  
installer that loads the latest versions of my packages so I don't  
need to hardwire versions. Its code is available on http://www.squeaksource.com/MetaclassTalk.html

Noury
------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Noury Bouraqadi - Enseignant/Chercheur
Responsable de l'enseignement de l'informatique
ARMINES - Ecole des Mines de Douai - Dept. I.A.
http://vst.ensm-douai.fr/noury

European Smalltalk Users Group Board
http://www.esug.org
------------------------------------------------------------------