[squeak-dev] ReleaseBuilder depends on Test

H. Hirzel hannes.hirzel at gmail.com
Wed May 8 20:55:43 UTC 2013


Thank you for pointing this out, Frank. I did not check in the code
when writing the email on Moday. Great!

--Hannes

On 5/6/13, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 6 May 2013 10:10, H. Hirzel <hannes.hirzel at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Yes, and then have a #cleanUp method in ReleaseBuilder with a literal
>> array of classes which needs this message sent to. Before sending the
>> #cleanUp there needs to be a check if the class is in the image.
>
> Ah, but there's the beauty in the scheme - I don't need to do that!
> Smalltalk cleanUp will run #cleanUp on all classes that implement it.
>
> frank
>
>> --Hannes
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5/4/13, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 4 May 2013 00:19, Levente Uzonyi <leves at elte.hu> wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 3 May 2013, Frank Shearar wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> ReleaseBuilder class >> #prepareNewBuild says
>>>>>
>>>>>    MCMockPackageInfo initialize.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I guess that's just a failed attempt to clean up some references.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> but I'm not clear on why the ReleaseBuilder needs to clear up test
>>>>> stuff. If it simply has to, maybe we should move MCMockPackageInfo and
>>>>> friends into Monticello-Mocks? If we unloaded Test, we wouldn't be
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That would probably break many MC tests.
>>>
>>> How about this then?
>>>
>>> MCMockPackageInfo class >> #cleanUp
>>>     self initialize.
>>>
>>> and then remove the offending line from ReleaseBuilder?
>>>
>>> (And what about doing the same for TextDomainManager?
>>>
>>> TextDomainManager class >> #cleanUp
>>>     self clearAllDomains
>>>
>>> and removing same from ReleaseBuilder?)
>>>
>>> frank
>>>
>>>> Levente
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> able to create a release!
>>>>>
>>>>> frank
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list