I have been creating PackageInfo subclasses for years for all of my
packages.  I really like storing meta information about packages
within the package itself and I recommend that others do this too,
because it allows the system more easily reflect on itself.

I use PackageInfo subclasses to sort packages in load-dependent order
and to easily create SAR files with "one-click."  (See MaSarPackage,
on SqueakMap).

MaSarPackage includes an extension to PackageInfo that allows proper
registration of a PackageInfo subclass, but to default to a superclass
instance if non-existent.  I think we should consider adopting this
into the trunk so that any package that wants to can declare its own
meta information and have it be saved in with the MC package.

 - Chris

On Fri, Sep 3, 2010 at 5:08 PM, Bernhard Pieber <bernhard at pieber.com> wrote:
> Am 03.09.2010 um 19:59 schrieb Ralph Johnson:
>> On 9/3/10, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
>>> A package is a (sub-) instance of PackageInfo. Packages are held by PackageOrganizer.
>>>
>>> One idea would be to include a PackageInfo subclass in each package, and its class comment or methods would describe the package. That would hook into HelpSystem so one could browse comments, instructions, examples etc. per package.
>>>
>>> There are a few conventions for that already, e.g. the class name should end in "Info" and it should be in a category named "PackageName-Info".
>> We could certainly include a PackageInfo subclass in a package.  But
>> Monticello wouldn't use it to make the instance of the package, would
>> it?
> The strange thing is that PackageInfo supported subclasses from day one. According to Avi they were even required at first. However, I looked but could not find a place in the code where they are instantiated. It seems that one has to manually register them by code in order to use them. It seems that no PackageInfo subclasses can be created by just using the tools. :-/
>
> - Bernhard
>