On 26 March 2013 16:28, Chris Muller <ma.chris.m at gmail.com> wrote:
>> I suppose I'm half asking whether Monticello package names should have
>> any meaning across repositories. Would people expect
>> Installer-Core.fbs.999 in squeak43 to mean the same thing as
>> Installer-Core.fbs.999 in squeak44? _I'd_ expect not (in which case
>> the right thing to do is backport the one change I want), but my
>> question is what _others_ expect.
>
> It's the 99% case that Monticello version names are unique, but the
> UUID of the PackageInfo is all MC has for truly unique identification.
>
> I think code should try to rely on the uuid and not on the names being
> unique, but sometimes there may be no other way to achieve a
> particular goal..

So just as a follow-up, I took the approach of porting all the
intermediate MCZs. That means that squeak43 has
Installer-Core-fbs.361, which necessitated upgrading Monticello to
Monticello-bf.494. I was lucky: I didn't have to upgrade anything
more. But it could have been much worse. In future I recommend
backporting only the exact change that you want, and no more. (The
Monticello upgrade was necessitated by Installer using
#packageAndBranchName.)

frank