[Q] Package dependencies in Monticello

lex at cc.gatech.edu lex at cc.gatech.edu
Thu Nov 4 05:08:30 UTC 2004


I've run into this exact problem, Chris.  If you have one level of
dependencies, everything works fine, but if you have multiple levels,
the saving of packages does not recurse deeply enough.  You can easily
end up with the wrong dependencies.  To get the dependencies all
updated, you have to save all packages starting from one level above the
leaves of your dependency tree.

I think the behavior is simply not what it should be.  If you save a
package, then I don't see why it should not also save all of the
dependencies, including indirect dependencies.  Monticello seems to be
saving the immediate dependencies, but simply not recursing.

Incidentally, I have stopped trying to track true dependencies with the
Monticello dependencies.  Instead, I use them purely for organization. 
The true dependencies are intellectually interesting, but I doubt I'm
getting them right, and I don't expect to ever take advantage of them,
and having lots of extra dependencies interferes with the up-the-tree
saves I described in the first paragraph of this email.  Dependencies
for organization are quite useful, on the other hand.  I can install
'Chuck-Standard' to get a normal install (and that's what I put on
SqueakMap), or 'Chuck-All' to also get experimental odds and ends that
only I would care about.  That's handy.


-Lex



More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list