[Squeakfoundation]A bit about SM1.1 and dependencies
danielv at netvision.net.il
Wed Feb 12 01:55:23 CET 2003
[I claim resources/links not needed for depedencies]
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?G=F6ran_Hultgren?= <goran.hultgren at bluefish.se> wrote:
> Well, I am having a hard time seeing where we should record our dependencies if
> we don't have Resources. They *are* needed. At least given my plan. :-)
Ok, just to show what I mean. Suppose I make a package type that holds a
single method that goes something like
Then I write a service that loads this kind of package, and does
packagesList collect: [:packagePair | SMSqueakMap loadPackage:
packagePair first version: packagePair second].
Or maybe something a little more complicated, but you can see where I'm
going... I don't need much more support.
> Sure. The cache thing is just something that annoys me - it is simply put
> incredibly stupid right now.
Hey, I'm just one voice here.. and not even offering any cash, so... ;-)
> Yes, but the modifying API is coupled with managing distributed change. At least
> as I have planned it. Otherwise the API would need to "call" the master server
> using some for of RPC yadda, yadda...
Ah, I see what you mean. I'd thought you were going to implement that
RPC anyway, since the image do need to communicate anyhow.
> > I have interest, and would be glad to help flesh out the services along
> > the lines above. Whether that'd be as a part of SM for you to integrate
> > or as a separate package - as you wish. It'll be very easy to specify
> > that the UIs require both SM and SM Services after we get dependencies,
> > so I don't see a problem... :-)
> I will try to get it out this weekend and perhaps you could take over the
> services part.
More information about the Squeakfoundation