Update stream loading from SM/Monticello (was Re: [FIX]
SUnit-combined-md)
Colin Putney
cputney at wiresong.ca
Wed Feb 11 20:34:28 UTC 2004
On Feb 11, 2004, at 3:10 PM, Doug Way wrote:
>> PS. This would also mean that we pull in VersionNumber and MCInstaller
>> into 3.7 Basic - but that seems alright to me.
>>
>
> Adding the Monticello installer in Basic is another issue which
> Michael & others posted about before. I'm personally fine with adding
> it. That may make Monticello a defacto standard and it may viral
> itself into a lot of code, but the same is true of changesets, and if
> MC is a good addition/successor to the changeset format, maybe that's
> a good thing. (Life would be pretty difficult if we insisted on not
> having ChangeSets or anything else as a standard, for example. :-) )
> I'm still not totally clear on where the dividing line between MC and
> PackageInfo is, I need to play around with MC more. But it sounds
> like we want the fuller capabilities of MC.
It's also important to differentiate between Monticello and MCInstaller.
I completely agree that Monticello shouldn't be in Basic. It's a fair
amount of code directed at a narrow purpose, and it's perfectly
reasonable to expect users to install it from SM.
OTOH, I think MCInstaller would be a reasonable addition to the base
image. It's just one class and it is broadly useful: it allows Squeak
to read a file format that Squeakers will encounter frequently.
Colin
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|