On 28.10.2014, at 22:31, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, Oct 28, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:
> 
> On 28.10.2014, at 20:28, Levente Uzonyi <leves at elte.hu> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 28 Oct 2014, Tobias Pape wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> On 28.10.2014, at 17:23, commits at source.squeak.org wrote:
> >>
> >>> Item was changed:
> >>> ==== ERROR ===
> >>>
> >>> Error: Unrecognized class type
> >>
> >> Well, this is gonna be interesting in the future.
> >> Are SPUR MCZs now completely incompatible to non-spur MCZs?
> >>
> >> This would be terrible…
> >>
> >
> > No, but Spur has new class formats which are not recognized by SqueakSource. I shouldn't be hard to fix it for someone who knows how SqueakSource works, and what the new formats are.
> 
> SqueakSource uses the available Monticello.
> This obviously means that the “old” monticello is incompatible to
> the Class formats of SPUR, right?
> 
> Arguably.  But simply update Monticello to Monticello-eem.592 or later and there's no problem.  Can we not do that for the SqueakSource image?  


Should be possible. But I have no access to it.

While we are at it; can we make provisions for 
GemStone class formats? They differ ever so slightly
and it is really hard to keep all in sync.

We now have:
	Squeak/Pharo Class formats (ca Squeak 3.8 - Squeak 4.6/Pharo3.0)
	Squeak/Pharo SPUR Class Formats (current and possibly onward)
	GemStone class formats (somewhat mapped from the squeak ones)

I did a bit of coding for the gemstone monticello version about one or
two years back and the mapping between the known monticello class formats
and gemstone class formats is a little fragile, I think.

Best
	-Tobias