Hi Chris,

I do not want to get involved in maintaining Personal SqueakSource, or
in publishing Personal SqueakSource releases to SqueakMap. Nor am I
interested in figuring out how to make the latest SqueakSource package
version work on a Squeak 5.2 image. It all sounds like great stuff for
somebody to do, but it needs to be somebody other than me.

If you want me to roll the image back to your original version and put
the updates into a patch.st file, I can do that. Please let me know.

Dave


On Fri, May 15, 2020 at 07:37:45PM -0500, Chris Muller wrote:
> > But looking that the configurations that you published for Personal
> > SqueakSource on SqueakMap, you are not referencing any of the copies
> > in the ss repository.
> 
> The fixed versions used to run source.squeak.org do pull from /ss.
> "5.2.1" is the current.
> 
> You're right that the head (development) version is pulling
> from squeaksource.com.  This is for instances besides
> source.squeak.org but the goal is for source.squeak.org to
> stay with it if it can.
> 
> > If you're building on a Squeak 5.2 release
> > image, you would either need to add a reference to the new copy in
> > the ss repository, or you would have to backport it to the squeak52
> > repository (I don't know if that's a good thing to do).
> 
> Yeah, I like your conservatism regarding backporting, that might
> actually be too aggressive for this feature.
> 
> So, simply adding a line to load it from a copy of the 5.2 script should work.
> 
> > Your patch (the one in the patch.st file) is a bit more complicated.
> > I added it to the head of the updates as SqueakSource-dtl.1128.
> > However, that version is incompatible with the Squeak 5.2 release
> > image due to some intermediate changes, so it cannot be used in the
> > source.squeak.org image.
> 
> Yes, but aren't those "incompatibilities" rather trivial?  Just pass
> the email id and repository from the repository instead?  (sorry I
> only had time to glance at it, didn't analyze...)
> 
> > I think this means that if you want a SqueakSource package that
> > contains your patch, and if you want to run it on a Squeak 5.2 image,
> > then you would need to branch the packages (i.e. make a package
> > with SqueakSource-cmm.1123 as the parent, and save it as
> > SqueakSource.squeak52-cmm.1124).
> >
> > Alternatively, you could just reinstate the patch.sh file on the
> > server and update its time stamp.
> 
> I hope we could just fix whatever's wrong with the intermediate versions..
> 
> > I'm happy to restore the patch.st file if you think that's the right
> > thing to do, but the rest of this stuff is a bit beyond my patience
> > threshold.
> 
> Cleaning and scraping requires a lot of patience when all you want to
> do is get to the fun painting part, but it's necessary for the best
> results.  If your enhancement isn't eventually properly integrated, it
> could suddenly disappear one day if another fix or enhancement became
> necessary that resulted in a new 5.2-based SqueakSource image.
> 
> Really, I think just adding the one line incantation to a new "5.2.2"
> Release is all that's needed, but the only way to know is for someone
> to try it, load it, upload it to andreas and restart the server.  This
> is what I thought your original plan was.
> 
>  - Chris
>