On 2/26/13, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:
> Am 26.02.2013 um 10:36 schrieb Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com>:
>
>> On 26 February 2013 06:42, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:
>>> Am 26.02.2013 um 06:30 schrieb Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de>:
>>>
>>>> Am 25.02.2013 um 21:37 schrieb Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks, I'll look into it.
>>>> (it worked form me because I had it in my package-cache)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Ok, this is fixed now.
>>>
>>> and
>>>
>>> Installer ss
>>>      project: 'MetacelloRepository';
>>>      install: 'ConfigurationOfOmniBrowser'.
>>> ((Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOfOmniBrowser) project version: #stable)
>>> load: #('Dev')
>>>
>>> Now works as expected.
>>> I tested it in a vanilla Squeak 4.4-12327
>>
>> Thanks, Tobias. That works great!
>>
>> This would make a good script for a (head) release on SqueakMap for
>> OmniBrowser. Colin?
>>
>> (It's not quite the same as OmniBrowser 2.0.4's script, which uses
>> #lastVersion (and it really should pin the version).)
>>
>> Given a head release, I'm happy to set up the CI job...
>
>
> Head would be better to use the #bleedingEdge version, I think.
> let me test… No.
>   Currently, the #stable version is pinned to what _I_ called
> 1.2.4.1 [1], but the #bleedingEdge uses the latest baseline,
> which is the there defined 1.4 baseline.
>
> -> for now, please use #stable :)
>
> The proper way now would be to define a 2.0 baseline which loads
> Lukas’ part (Polymorph) for Pharo and Colin’s  part for Squeak
> (Toolbuilder).

+1
assuming it is possible.

>
> Lukas, Colin, if you are listening, would that be about right?
>
> Best
> 	-Tobias
>
>
> [1] What would be the proper version? Given Colins numbering (2.0.4)
>     would it be 2.0.5 or 2.1?
>
>
>
>