"slices" of packages (was: A process proposal for 3.10)
stephane ducasse
stephane.ducasse at gmail.com
Tue Oct 17 20:05:34 UTC 2006
On 17 oct. 06, at 16:49, Lex Spoon wrote:
> "Pavel Krivanek" <squeak1 at continentalbrno.cz> writes:
>> Very good notes. This problems are described in the thread with
>> Stef's
>> postmortem analysis
>> (http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2006-
>> October/109807.html)
>
>
> It is just painful reading Stephane's description of package slices.
Sorry.
Package universes are not the solution to the problem I described.
At the end of the process of course you can get a number of package
working in the context of an
universe.
Now in the process of getting a set of package working together you
need to identify
that package 1.5 is working with packageX 2.1 because you want to be
able to rollback
or to reload them together. This is why we had a script loader and
kept all this information.
Stef
>
> Why not use Package Universes to organize a collection of package
> versions? There would be a 3.10 release universe. The release team
> would know the update password, and they could update that universe
> with new package versions as they see fit.
>
> Just give me the word, and I'd be happy to set up a server for you to
> experiment with.
>
>
> -Lex
>
>
>
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|