On Fri, 15 Apr 2011, Frank Shearar wrote:

> On 2011/04/15 18:21, Hannes Hirzel wrote:
>> On 4/11/11, Frank Shearar<frank.shearar at angband.za.org>  wrote:
>>> On 2011/04/11 01:46, Levente Uzonyi wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 8 Apr 2011, Frank Shearar wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> When I load it into a virgin image I follow the order above. I
>>>>> wouldn't stake my life on it being entirely 100% correct. There might
>>>>> be some interaction between the Morphic and Tools packages, in
>>>>> particular, because the Morphic version has changes to how Browsers 
>>>>> open.
>>>>> 
>>>>> I have, for instance, noticed that my image "goes away" sometimes when
>>>>> I load Morphic. I can hit alt-. and abandon the process, and
>>>>> everything Just Works.
>>>> 
>>>> I finally set up my Trunk clone, where I could test the integration of
>>>> your changes. I didn't face the problem you described, but I found
>>>> another one. MessageSets (senders, implementors, etc) opened before the
>>>> update will have their messageListIndex instance variable uninitialized.
>>>> This means that #messageListIndex will return nil instead of an integer.
>>>> So if I had some senders/implementors browsers open before the update, I
>>>> get a debugger for each of them after it. Implementing #messageListIndex
>>>> as
>>>> 
>>>> ^messageListIndex ifNil: [ 0 ]
>>>> 
>>>> solves this issue. The state of the browsers will not be preserved this
>>>> way, but it's not worth writing complex migration code for this IMHO.
>>> 
>>> Ah yes, because of instvar move: the new MessageSet instvar will be nil,
>>> and nothing's yet set it to a valid value (i.e., an index).
>>> 
>>> See version 339!
>>> 
>>> frank
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> What is the decision on this?
>> 
>> And: Do we need to keep the old versions in the inbox?
>
> Levente said that _all_ versions should be into Treated when everyone's 
> happy, so that we have complete and entire Monticello histories.

Did I? If so, I was wrong. All versions will be moved to the Trunk after 
the merge is done. This happens with all merged contributions, why would 
this be an exception?

Since everyone seems to be happy, I'll merge it real soon now.


Levente

>
> Of course, I can't comment on the decision :)
>
> frank
>
>