Another problem with the current fileout format
PhiHo Hoang
phiho.hoang at rogers.com
Tue Jul 1 04:36:42 UTC 2003
Hi Guys,
> It sounds like you and the other "Berne guys" are running into
> difficulties with concurrent development. That's exactly the problem
> that Monticello and CVS are meant to solve. Avi, Julian, Andrew and I
> (the "Vancouver guys," I guess) have been using them for several months
> now - they work great. You really ought to take the time to try them
> out.
It's quite a warm feeling to see the collaboration and co-operation between
Squeak Guys.
Please keep up with the great work of Monticello, Vancouver guys.
Happy Kanata day.
Cheers,
PhiHo.
P.S: Ka-na-ta: originally an Iroquoian word for a community or group of huts.
http://www.kidsfromkanata.org/~KFK/files/KANATA%20Name.html
----- Original Message -----
From: "Colin Putney" <cputney at wiresong.ca>
To: "The general-purpose Squeak developers list" <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2003 6:28 AM
Subject: Re: Another problem with the current fileout format
>
> On Sunday, June 29, 2003, at 02:18 AM, Stephane Ducasse wrote:
>
> > Our problem was that we had 3.5 complaint changeset and that we wanted
> > to load them in 3.6alpha in which class had
> > been removed in parallel. So alex built a splitter that given a set of
> > removals and a changeset generates a new changeset and a set of
> > changesets for each of the removals. So perfect.
>
> [snip]
>
> > This kind of explicit representation would work well for class
> > definition, Pool Definition, Class initialization too this means that
> > we could load code without executing it and this would support all
> > kinds of cool tools. Note that this was one of the idea behind the
> > file format of Ginsu.
>
> This is exactly the reason we wrote Monticello.
>
> Monticello uses a declarative representation of Smalltalk code, along
> the same lines as the ANSI spec or Ginsu. When loading a package, it
> creates a model of the package, analyzes it in relation to the image,
> produces a patch, and applies the patch to the image.
>
> If it finds any unmet dependencies during the analysis, it will show
> you what parts of the package it won't be able to compile, and gives
> you the option to continue on with the whatever *can* be compiled or
> quit and leave your image unchanged. I suspect that this would have
> solved the problem you mentioned.
>
> It sounds like you and the other "Berne guys" are running into
> difficulties with concurrent development. That's exactly the problem
> that Monticello and CVS are meant to solve. Avi, Julian, Andrew and I
> (the "Vancouver guys," I guess) have been using them for several months
> now - they work great. You really ought to take the time to try them
> out.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Colin
>
>
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|