Dependencies in Monticello?

Philippe Marschall philippe.marschall at
Mon Jan 14 12:09:14 UTC 2008

2008/1/14, Norbert Hartl <norbert at>:
> On Sun, 2008-01-13 at 21:48 +0100, Jason Johnson wrote:
> > Well, I just thought using a Universe would be simpler then some kind
> > of configuration script.  Then when you decide a new version is ready
> > for prime time you can press a couple of buttons in the Universe
> > browser instead of updating a script.
> >
> > Though it sounds like this isn't simpler for you, and that was what I
> > was really wondering in my query.  I wonder if something could be done
> > to change that and make it easy enough to do that it would be a
> > productivity boost for you.
> I don't think universe is the right tool for development because:
> - it is tedious to create a new version of a package. Doing that
>   frequently will become annoying
> - If you change 3 packages you need to do this 3 times
> - I don't even know how I could update a headless image with
>   universe
> - I know pretty well the depencies of my packages
> If I understand MCConfigurations right it is the tool that does
> exactly this. You can take a snapshot of the packages by pressing
> one button. With the .mcm file you can update the images of your
> co-developer as well as a headless image.

That's right, but it's two butons. has made a Continous
Integration server based on MCM.


> The focus of universe is more of a "release" system not a developer
> system.
> Norbert

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list