Thank you for the explanation, Dale.

stp

--------

Stephen Travis Pope    Ojai, California, USA
    
     http://HeavenEverywhere.com
     http://FASTLabInc.com
     https://vimeo.com/user19434036/videos
     http://heaveneverywhere.com/Reflections



> On Jan 2, 2023, at 9:08 AM, Dale Henrichs <dale.henrichs at gemtalksystems.com> wrote:
> 
> The *<package-name> convention dates back to the origins of Monticello (20 years ago?). With package membership  encoded into fields already maintained by the browser and already stored by the system (class and method categories) Monticello could be easily introduced into an existing system without forcing everyone to convert to a new set of tools.
> 
> At the end of the day, Monticello doesn't need to change, while the system tools that work with packages classes and methods WOULD have to change, so it isn't really a bug in Monticello, but  a lack of system/tool support ...
> 
> The Pharo folks changed their tools and internal models (in the last 5-10 years?) to not be entirely dependent on the category-naming convention, but of course, the *<package-name> convention would still need to be supported for use with cross-platform Monticello-based projects like Seaside.
> 
> Dale
> 
> 
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2023 at 7:03 AM Stephen Travis Pope <stephen at heaveneverywhere.com <mailto:stephen at heaveneverywhere.com>> wrote:
>> 
>> I’d say this is a pretty serious bug in Monticello, and that, even if it’s easy to explain, it makes the system much harder to navigate (and, more importantly, to learn), and should be reversed right away.
>> 
>> Why not have a field in the method object for package membership (a Set, of course, to allow multiple values)?
>> 
>> stp
>> 
>> --------
>> 
>> Stephen Travis Pope    Ojai, California, USA
>>     <pastedGraphic.tiff>
>>      http://HeavenEverywhere.com <http://heaveneverywhere.com/>
>>      http://FASTLabInc.com <http://fastlabinc.com/>
>>      https://vimeo.com/user19434036/videos
>>      http://heaveneverywhere.com/Reflections
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jan 1, 2023, at 3:41 PM, tim Rowledge <tim at rowledge.org <mailto:tim at rowledge.org>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> It's just how Monticello works out which methods go in which packages. I agree it can result in some clumsiness but it is very simple to implement and perhaps more importantly, to explain to users.
>>> 
>>>> On 2023-01-01, at 1:20 PM, Stephen Travis Pope <stephen at heaveneverywhere.com <mailto:stephen at heaveneverywhere.com>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> Hello again,
>>>> 
>>>> In reference to my previous query, when did it become fashionable to have method category (protocol) names that signified the package?  How does this help in navigating the system?
>>>> 
>>>> It’s quite confusing when I go to a system class in the browser and see a list of protocols like this,
>>>> 
>>>> <protocols.jpg>
>>>> 
>>>> Isn't there a field in the method header where we could store this, and still use the simpler standard list of protocols to assist in learning the system?  Remember, the first rule of reuse is, “if you can’t find it, you can’t reuse it.” 
>>>> 
>>>> stp
>>>> 
>>>> --------
>>>> 
>>>> Stephen Travis Pope    Ojai, California, USA
>>>>    <pastedGraphic.tiff>
>>>>     http://HeavenEverywhere.com <http://heaveneverywhere.com/>
>>>>     http://FASTLabInc.com <http://fastlabinc.com/>
>>>>     https://vimeo.com/user19434036/videos
>>>>     http://heaveneverywhere.com/Reflections
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> tim
>>> --
>>> tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org <mailto:tim at rowledge.org>; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
>>> Oxymorons: Soft rock
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20230102/8c2bdb51/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: pastedGraphic.tiff
Type: image/tiff
Size: 2442 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20230102/8c2bdb51/attachment-0001.tiff>