tim at sumeru.stanford.edu
Mon Apr 7 12:42:15 CEST 2003
Daniel Vainsencher <danielv at netvision.net.il> wrote:
> I agree that we should make sure removal of a package doesn't break
> either it or other stuff in the image.
> I don't know whether there's a point in separating the refactorings from
> the removal package. After all, the removal package is supposed to get
> rolled into the updatestream.
Looks like we're already seeing the potential for problems with removal
code; macroBenchmarks interacting with vm code remove, games remove etc.
I guess we just need to stay aware of the potential for now since this
is a phase that ought to be over reasonably soon. I hope. As we
incorporate the assorted removals we can (I think) remove the items from
the SM list. If we do that at least we can avoid future problems when
somebody tries to use an out of date removal script.
Tim Rowledge, tim at sumeru.stanford.edu, http://sumeru.stanford.edu/tim
This is very curious ... as if someone was eating the wrong sort of
mushrooms when they invented this sort of thing
More information about the Squeakfoundation