On Tue, Aug 24, 2010 at 3:04 PM, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:

> On 8/24/2010 2:12 PM, Eliot Miranda wrote:
>
>> I always appreciated the 95% rule, a.k.a. don't let the perfect be the
>> enemy of the good.  Right now if one removes all packages and updates
>> one gets an ugly mess one can wade through with the debugger.  If one
>> were to simply skip the packages not in one's image one could certainly
>> get to a point that might miss a required package, but one could also
>> update without wading through the mess, without having to go through the
>> remove unloadable packages step and without having to go through
>> whatever other steps one had gone through to produce a finished image.
>>
>> E.g. take my OS Cog VMMaker image which has been derived from an unload
>> step to be nice to svn users; the image is half the size of the normal
>> one.  It's a mild pain to build, loading packages, adding workspaces and
>> repositories etc.  Yes I could automate all this but it would be much
>> nicer to build it once and periodically update it.  I don't care if it
>> misses some required package; I can deal with that issue when I get to
>> it.  But not being able to update without wading through mud is, to put
>> it mildly, a downer.
>>
>
> I don't think you understand what I mean by "required" package :-) Consider
> that we're splitting the Morphic package along the lines that Pavel
> proposed. We add a MorphicWidgets package that includes all the
> Pluggable*Morphs. The problem is that the next version of the Morphic
> package will show these as REMOVALS so if you update the Morphic package and
> leave out the MorphicWidgets your image is an instant goner. That's what I
> mean by "required"; not some random goodie that nobody cares if it's absent.
>
> Worse, this wouldn't just happen to people who have deliberately chosen to
> update only a subset; it would happen to *everyone* updating their trunk
> images and make it pretty much impossible to perform such operations. Unless
> we can find a solution to this problem, I think Bert's alternative is the
> only reasonable one - add an explicit list of ignored packages for the
> updater and you can add to that list whatever you want and it won't get
> updated. You'll have to deal with the consequences if something goes wrong
> there but as you said, you can deal with that when you get to it.
>

BTW, I'm not proposing relaxing this rule for trunk images, only for images
in which packages have been unloaded, even packages in which all unloadable
packages have been unloaded.  I don't want to wreck updating, all I want is
for updating to work to some acceptable degree in
unload-all-unloadable-packages (UAUP) images.

I'm sorry, I thought I was being clear and wasn't.  It is IMO preferrable to
add a hack for UAUP images that allows them to update the packages they have
available than the current situation where updating is possible only in a
full trunk image.

best
Eliot


>
> Cheers,
>  - Andreas
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20100824/07e173c7/attachment.htm