[squeak-dev] Re: 3.10.2 Forever ? (was Re: How to get a Trunk image)

Colin Putney cputney at wiresong.ca
Tue Sep 8 06:51:12 UTC 2009


On 7-Sep-09, at 11:11 PM, Andreas Raab wrote:

> Yes, that is equivalent to having a configuration map for every  
> update. Unfortunately it means that every single update consists of  
> two package commits; one for the contents and one for the meta  
> package (or config map).

Right, dependencies and configuration maps are equivalent, and so far  
we've been using config maps. An oversight on my part.

But it doesn't (necessarily) mean a commit of the config map for each  
package commit. Every time you make changes that span several packages  
(and I've seen quite a few of these in the commit messages), you can  
roll them into one config map commit. Or to reduce the overhead  
further, you could roll groups of unrelated changes into the same  
config map. What's the optimal tradeoff between overhead to create a  
new config map and the size of the delta between successive config maps?

I suppose we *already* have a unique config map number that describes  
the state of the image. Maybe we just need to increase it's resolution  
a bit? Or just start using it as is?

Colin





More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list