Am 16.09.2005 um 14:57 schrieb Martin Wirblat:
>
> For publishing e.g. on SM you then would have to publish the  
> modified version of the original package, too. It is probably big  
> and has nothing to do with your application. As soon as the  
> original changes, the modified version had to be synchronized. All  
> that because of one changed method?

If it is only one method, a .mcd relative to the "official" version  
is very small.

> For private use this may not look much different. For instance, I  
> am regularly "fixing some inflexibilities of the official image"  
> before I use it, by overriding some things of the UI and perhaps  
> other things. Is that better done by creating some big modified  
> versions of original packages just because of a few changed  
> methods? When the next image - or worse the next interim update -  
> comes out, I would have to sort out my few changes from the  
> possibly many official changes applied to the package in the meantime.

Monticello is designed to allow precisely this style of development.  
You just merge your version with the official version and you're  
done. As a developer you should of course enable the #upgradeIsMerge  
preference.

> As long as you are developing a master image, it is the right way  
> to create modified versions of original packages. They immediately  
> become the new originals;) This kind of work is wonderfully  
> supported by Monticello with its many merging facilities.  
> Nonetheless, if you want to develop a second master *partly*  
> synchronized with another master line, there will be much work  
> waiting for you, accumulating over time...

This is a false assertion. Did you actually try? I regularily have  
private changes to "official" packages. Upgrading them works great.

> For all other purposes that want to derive from a master but want  
> to develop with the master (and that is the standard case), some  
> sort of "delta functionality" is needed. This delta should be as  
> smoothly as possible addable to the next version of the master,  
> because this work has to be done manifold (by the millions of the  
> future, that are going to use Squeak:)

Like .mcd?

> Monticello seems to me not being so well suited for this task.  
> Either it should be accompanied by a module system like the one of  
> Henrik, or perhaps it is sufficient that it will be extended with  
> this delta functionality.

It seems to me you're just not comfortable using Monticello, yet.  
This may point out an interface problem. I'm open to suggestions (or  
even better, code).

- Bert -