<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000">
Douglas Brebner wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4A5FA924.1080004@fang.demon.co.uk" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Joshua Gargus wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">Douglas Brebner wrote:
</pre>
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">the numbered release images will be build from a set of specific
package releases and mantis submissions. (Think of these as branches
that should only receive fixes)
The latest mainline image will be built from the latest mainline
packages. (Fixes can be pulled and tested, then folded in but won't be
the main method of development).
Your own custom images can be built from whatever packages you like.
(can be a mix of specific release or latest)
They'd all be built automatically from a build config for Kieths tool.
Normal development would be done on a package basis, not a whole image
basis. The only exception would be for restructuring where the package
boundaries change.
I think part of the problem is that some people are thinking in terms of
package development and others in terms of randomly messing with the
whole image.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap="">I'm thinking about both at the same time. Packages are good, and
Squeak development happens in Squeak images. I believe that when
someone goes to squeak.org, there should be an easy-to-find image that
has the tools necessary to track current development. That image may
be built by Bob (why not?), and will have MC loaded (otherwise it
couldn't track current development).
The exact same packages as in this image (or a subset/superset/etc.)
can be used to build other images using Bob. I'm agreeing with you
that "conveniently structured images built from packages is what
Keith's build tool is for".
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->I think we're actually in violent agreement.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
Compared to some exchanges on this thread, I'd hardly call it violent
:-)<br>
<br>
Cheers,<br>
Josh<br>
<br>
<br>
<blockquote cite="mid:4A5FA924.1080004@fang.demon.co.uk" type="cite">
<pre wrap="">What I've been getting at is that some people seem to see the trunk repo
as a place to work on core packages with seperate build systems and
others see it as a place to hack on the big blob image old-style.
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</body>
</html>