Hi Avi!
Avi Bryant avi@beta4.com wrote:
On Thu, 22 May 2003 goran.krampe@bluefish.se wrote:
Definitely. And btw, I have come to realize that PackageInfo and SMCard (future SMPackage) don't necessarily map "one to one". This is important.
Can you elaborate on this?
Yes. SMPackage is tyically a "published" package made for consumption/use of others. A PackageInfo-package may be simply an internal component of such a published package. In short - there may be more PackageInfos than there are SMPackages but there will typically always be one PackageInfo per SMPackage. :-)
Looking at CVS again I would say that PackageInfo corresponds a tad with the "modules" you can define in the CVSROOT/Modules file. Partitions of the project suitable for the developers.
And SMPackage again - is a "public" package used by others.
So my conclusion is that both concepts are valid and disjoint but we should try to NOT introduce any *more* of these "kinda-module-thingies" into the Squeak world. :-)
Including DVS (which currently uses the same internal code as Monticello I think) would be good to make sure people move over to that kind of fileout much more suitable for packages.
Well, all that's actually needed for this is PackageInfo (and maybe some super-simple UI like right clicking on a category name in the PackagePaneBrowser and having a "file-out package" option).
DVS and Monticello don't share any code, by the way; they both depend on PackageInfo, but that's it.
Aha, ok. I remembered wrong. I thought sometime you said that you had moved DVS over to use the same internal code that Monticello does.
regards, Göran