OK, I've hacked -270. I need to revert the 4.5 base that I have to a
pre-270 version, which I'll do tomorrow. Hopefully that will fix
things.

frank

On 12 December 2013 21:44, Chris Muller <ma.chris.m at gmail.com> wrote:
> I guess I meant that when we're in such a messed-up alpha state
> anyway, there's no harm in simply correcting it in update-fbs.270.
>
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 3:22 PM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I have no idea what you mean. Yes, the config map exists, and I know
>> very well why the package is in the image. What I _don't_ know is how
>> to fix the problem. Bear in mind that the latest config map is 272!
>>
>> Do I add a postscript to ToolBuilder-Tests that unregisters ToolBuilderTests?
>>
>> frank
>>
>> On 12 December 2013 20:42, Chris Muller <ma.chris.m at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> update-fbs.270
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 2:20 PM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> No. Updating from the latest alpha image is what I did, and definitely
>>>> does have ToolBuilderTests. Look in the manifest of the latest
>>>> SqueakTrunk build
>>>> (http://build.squeak.org/job/SqueakTrunk/667/console):
>>>>
>>>> <snip>
>>>> 2013-12-12T02:46:47.668000014+01:00: ToolBuilderTests (fbs.1)
>>>> 2013-12-12T02:46:47.668000015+01:00: Tools (nice.508)
>>>> 2013-12-12T02:46:47.668000016+01:00: ToolsTests (fbs.67)
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> frank
>>>>
>>>> On 12 December 2013 19:48, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Updating from the lastest alpha image, which is how we'll produce release
>>>>> image, will never get ToolBuilderTests.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 1:18 PM, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ah, but that unloading was manual?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> frank
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12 December 2013 19:16, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> > I have ToolBuilder-Tests after updating from trunk.  I unloaded
>>>>>> > ToolBuilderTests.
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 12:37 PM, Frank Shearar
>>>>>> > <frank.shearar at gmail.com>
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> Despite the lack of a ToolBuilderTests, and the presence of a
>>>>>> >> ToolBuilder-Tests package, Monticello Browser tells me that I have a
>>>>>> >> ToolBuilderTests, not a ToolBuilder-Tests.
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> frank
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >> On 11 December 2013 20:56, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com>
>>>>>> >> wrote:
>>>>>> >> > OK, I think I've done the right thing - mind giving it a check?
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > frank
>>>>>> >> >
>>>>>> >> > On 11 December 2013 11:20, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com>
>>>>>> >> > wrote:
>>>>>> >> >> Thanks, Chris. I've prepped the changes, and I'll push them tonight.
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> frank
>>>>>> >> >>
>>>>>> >> >> On 11 December 2013 02:19, Chris Muller <ma.chris.m at gmail.com>
>>>>>> >> >> wrote:
>>>>>> >> >>> - delete ToolBuilderTests-fbs.2  too, since you have its code in
>>>>>> >> >>> the
>>>>>> >> >>> new -1.
>>>>>> >> >>>
>>>>>> >> >>> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 8:17 PM, Chris Muller
>>>>>> >> >>> <ma.chris.m at gmail.com>
>>>>>> >> >>> wrote:
>>>>>> >> >>>> Since there is no ancestry yet, you can remove the ancestry and
>>>>>> >> >>>> start
>>>>>> >> >>>> over:
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> - Delete working copy ToolBuilderTests.
>>>>>> >> >>>> - Add ToolBuilderTests back (+Package button).  Ancestry is now
>>>>>> >> >>>> clean.
>>>>>> >> >>>> - Use the rename function from the menu to rename ToolBuilderTests
>>>>>> >> >>>> to
>>>>>> >> >>>> ToolBuilder-Tests.
>>>>>> >> >>>> - Save ToolBuilder-Tests-fbs.1.
>>>>>> >> >>>> - delete ToolBuilderTests-fbs.1 from the repository.
>>>>>> >> >>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Frank Shearar
>>>>>> >> >>>> <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> >> >>>>> n 10 December 2013 00:21, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com>
>>>>>> >> >>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> PS -- Since it was for aesthetic reasons, it would be better
>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> and
>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> more
>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> consistent if it were named "ToolBuilder-Tests" instead of
>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> "ToolBuilderTests".
>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> Sure, but then Monticello forces you to have as many packages
>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> as
>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> there are
>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> ToolBuilder-Foo thingies, right?  That's ok for ToolBuilder,
>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> but
>>>>>> >> >>>>>>> for Tools
>>>>>> >> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>>> I was talking about ToolBuilder-*, not Tools.  The other
>>>>>> >> >>>>>> packages
>>>>>> >> >>>>>> in
>>>>>> >> >>>>>> the family are
>>>>>> >> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>>>   ToolBuilder-Morphic
>>>>>> >> >>>>>>   ToolBuilder-MVC
>>>>>> >> >>>>>>   ToolBuilder-SUnit
>>>>>> >> >>>>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>>> Whoa!  ALL of which have no definitions!  Frank is this
>>>>>> >> >>>>>> something
>>>>>> >> >>>>>> you
>>>>>> >> >>>>>> modularized out?  So we should somehow remove these
>>>>>> >> >>>>>> WorkingCopy's
>>>>>> >> >>>>>> from
>>>>>> >> >>>>>> the trunk image.  Via some postscript perhaps?
>>>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>> Nah, I just did the wrong thing. Worse, I even paused to think
>>>>>> >> >>>>> about
>>>>>> >> >>>>> the package name before doing the wrong thing. The question is:
>>>>>> >> >>>>> how
>>>>>> >> >>>>> to
>>>>>> >> >>>>> rename the package? It's trivial to rename the package through
>>>>>> >> >>>>> the
>>>>>> >> >>>>> UI.
>>>>>> >> >>>>> But now I have a ToolBuilderTests-fbs.2. Is the right thing to do
>>>>>> >> >>>>> the
>>>>>> >> >>>>> following?:
>>>>>> >> >>>>> * rename the mcz to ToolBuilder-Tests-fbs.2
>>>>>> >> >>>>> * copy that to trunk
>>>>>> >> >>>>> * change the config map to reference this instead of
>>>>>> >> >>>>> ToolBuilderTests-fbs.1
>>>>>> >> >>>>>
>>>>>> >> >>>>> frank
>>>>>> >>
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> >
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>