On Tue, 3 Jul 2018, Tobias Pape wrote:

>
>> On 02.07.2018, at 15:26, Levente Uzonyi <leves at caesar.elte.hu> wrote:
>> 
>> +1, but the configuration has to be updated first to load the correct versions.
>
> ok.. can you elaborate?

If you evaluate the proposed snippet in a Trunk image, you'll find that 
the loaded Refactoring Engine code sends deprecated methods and there is 
no support for the new class formats introduced by Spur.

Levente

>
>
>> 
>> Levente
>> 
>> On Mon, 2 Jul 2018, H. Hirzel wrote:
>> 
>>> Proposal
>>> 
>>> Take the result of this discussion
>>>
>>>  Installer ensureRecentMetacello.
>>>  Metacello new
>>>              configuration: 'RefactoringTools';
>>>              load.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> and put it into the Squeak help file subject 'Extending the system'
>>> thus replacing the Omnibrowser script.
>>> 
>>> --Hannes
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 5/11/18, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On 10.05.2018, at 18:41, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> ... and... how to get Metacello please?
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Installer ensureRecentMetacello
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 6:29 AM, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:
>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 10.05.2018, at 09:19, H. Hirzel <hannes.hirzel at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Hello
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Following up on this thread.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Where do I get the latest version of the RefactoringTools updated for
>>>>>>> the most recent trunk version?
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> There are some SqueakMap entries but they are outdated.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> This
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/831
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> seems to give recent information as well.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> This is the most recent info.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I short, if you have Metacello,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>      Metacello new
>>>>>>              configuration: 'RefactoringTools';
>>>>>>              load.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> That's about it.
>>>>>> Marcel and Me will keep the Config up to date.
>>>>>> We have not made any SqueakMap entries.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Best regards
>>>>>>      -Tobias
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> --Hannes
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On 11/3/17, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Jacob,
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Jakob Reschke
>>>>>>>> <forums.jakob at resfarm.de>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Am 02.11.2017 7:11 nachm. schrieb "Eliot Miranda"
>>>>>>>>> <eliot.miranda at gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>> :
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 3:15 AM, Marcel Taeumel <marcel.taeumel at hpi.de>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Next step would be to build a preview tool that supports add/remove
>>>>>>>>>> steps
>>>>>>>>>> of a refactoring. For example, a "rename message" might tackle too
>>>>>>>>>> much
>>>>>>>>>> methods. That is, there is no scoping at the moment.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> OK.  We likely definitely want to scope by package(s), right?
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Unless you wanted to say "packages, not classes or categories" I do
>>>>>>>>> not
>>>>>>>>> think so. Mostly because projects/software is often divided into -Core
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>>> -Tests packages. Or think of -Examples, -Plugins, -Extensions... So I
>>>>>>>>> fear
>>>>>>>>> explicit input of the scope (a set of packages) will be required.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I think offering two scopes is adequate:
>>>>>>>> a) the entire system
>>>>>>>> b) classes and extension methods whose package name matches either a
>>>>>>>> prefix
>>>>>>>> or a pattern
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Using package dependencies (like in ENVY) would be nice, but they are
>>>>>>>>> unmaintained in Monticello (often only supplied with Metacello).
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Oh, and my Environments bell is ringing again... ;-)
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Remember that one can always generate more narrowly scoped refactoring
>>>>>>>> by
>>>>>>>> 1. performing the refactoring on some larger scope (e.g. the entire
>>>>>>>> system)
>>>>>>>> 2. quitting the system
>>>>>>>> 3. using the changes crash recovery tool to select the desired
>>>>>>>> refactorings
>>>>>>>> or by using method versions to revert any unwanted
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> So having a simple generally useful scope such as package or package
>>>>>>>> prefix
>>>>>>>> would work for me.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> _,,,^..^,,,_
>>>>>>>> best, Eliot
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>