[squeak-dev] Re: Packages, Packages, Packages

Andreas Raab andreas.raab at gmx.de
Sat Dec 12 06:02:33 UTC 2009

Chris Cunnington wrote:
> You've outlined the technical merits of the different systems, but I 
> think that the community has chosen Monticello. My experience looking 
> for an RFB that worked demonstrated to me that it's the only system 
> people take seriously for updating. A sudden change in direction to SM 
> or Universes is going to jar the largest number of people, I would imagine. 

Without implying any judgment here this would mean that we really have 
to fix dependencies in Monticello for the style of use we're after here. 
By which I mean that in order to express "this package requires Seaside 
and Tweak and Croquet" we can't expect people to list all the 500 MC 
packages that make up Seaside, Tweak and Croquet.

> What about parcels? Elliot was saying some extremely compelling things 
> about them recently. Is that a non-starter or too far in the future? 

I'm specifically trying to avoid starting yet another package management 
system. Our problem isn't that we have none, our problem is that we have 
too many and that none of them works for the situation that we're 
looking at. So I'm in strong favor of taking one of the existing 
solutions and just fix them.

   - Andreas

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list