On 4/8/2011 11:45, Igor Stasenko wrote:
> On 8 April 2011 01:55, Casey Ransberger<casey.obrien.r at gmail.com>  wrote:
>> IMHO fake packages are awful.

They are better than no packages.

> I dreaming that some day we could do stuff like:
>
> newClass := Object subclass: #Foo.
>
> myPackage add: newClass.
> myPackage add: (Object>>#extensionMethod)
>
> and even:
>
> myPackage add: icon.
>
> and then:
>
> myPackage serializeTo: aStream.
>
> and then:
>
> myPackage := Package loadFrom: aStream.
>
> what could be more simpler and powerful?

Then write it. It's trivial, we both know it. And when you've written it 
you'll see that the problem isn't coming up with an artificial Package 
class. The problem is that you need to integrate with all the existing 
tools out there. And that's why PackageInfo is useful. It is fake but it 
provides a set of conventions that actually work. Love it or hate it, 
but unless someone actually provides an alternative I much prefer fake 
packages over no packages.

Cheers,
   - Andreas