[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
|