[Seaside-dev] about going alpha

[Lukas Renggli]

>  >>  As described in comment and mails. If nobody has any opinion on this
>  >>  I'll just do as I please. This means prefixing the categories with
>  >>  Seaside- and naming the versions 2.8.999.alpha1.
>  >
>  > I don't think that the Universe approach works.
>
> What are the issues you see?

- The integration of new universes is not possible without patching
the main Universe distribution.
- Some people are not willing to load the XML and the Universe Package
into their deployment images.

> What do you propose instead?

Something along this: http://mootools.net/core

As build options I see:

- Change-Set: A change-set that adds the repos and loads the selected
packages in order from Monticello. Download and drop it onto an image
to load Seaside.
- Monticello-Map: Essentially the same as above, just a different
output format. There are some people that use that.
- Universe-XML: Essentially the same as above, just a different output
format. There are some people that use that.

>  > Nobody is using
>  > Universes (with the exception of Web-Dev Image maker)
>
> Do you have anything to support this claim?

Over a month ago we announced Seaside 2.8.3 to be downloadable from
SqueakMap and Universe. Due to a bug in the publishing code Seaside
never appeared on Universe. Nobody complained.

Well, maybe nobody is using Seaside ;-)

>  > If don't want XML and Universe in my
>  > image for a deployment, what should I do then?
>
> What do you do if you don't want Monticello in your image for
>  deployment? If we provide a Universe there's nothing stopping us from
>  making an MCM or .cs.

We could also build a complet .st file-in, but that doesn't need to
happen in the first place. Or an image-segment for instant-loading.

> Written above. I fear that it might take at least half a year or more
>  to get something that people can try if we don't start focusing now.

Sure, I agree.

Lukas

-- 
Lukas Renggli
http://www.lukas-renggli.ch