On 2013-05-31, at 10:39, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 31 May 2013 00:02, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:
>> 
>> On 2013-05-30, at 23:40, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> On 23 May 2013 18:47, Frank Shearar <frank.shearar at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I noticed this morning that every package that uses ToolBuilder has a
>>>> transitive dependency on both Morphic and MVC (in the form of the ST80
>>>> package). This is caused by MorphicToolBuilder and MVCToolBuilder.
>>>> 
>>>> I suggest either rename 'ToolBuilder-Morphic' to 'Morphic-ToolBuilder'
>>>> and 'ToolBuilder-MVC' to 'ST80-ToolBuilder' (or'MVC-ToolBuilder').
>>>> This would move Morphic-specific stuff where it belongs, and ditto for
>>>> MVC.
>>> 
>>> So I tried renaming the packages. It's fine, it works. I just don't
>>> know how to actually commit that to Trunk. Ideas?
>> 
>> 
>> What's the issue? Isn't it simply that some classes moved from Toolbuilder to Morphic, and some from Toolbuilder to ST80? So if you commit all three packages it should just work?
> 
> I opted to move ToolBuilder-Morphic to MorphicToolBuilder to maintain
> _some_ degree of separation.

I don't feel that's necessary. It could just be part of Morphic.

> It might be a fool's errand, given that
> loads of Morphic things reference UIManager and so already have a
> direct dependency on ToolBuilder.
> 
> Assuming that this move is good (as in, better than
> ToolBuilder-Morphic -> Morphic-ToolBuilder, putting these classes in
> the Morphic package), I guess my newbie senses are tingling. This
> change guts 3 packages and adds 3 new ones. But I guess all I need to
> do - this is the part I'd like some reassurance with - is:
> * upload everything to trunk,
> * publish a config map with the new packages before ToolBuilder,
> * LEAVE the ToolBuilder-${NowEmpty} packages in the map,
> * (much later, maybe in the 4.5 windup) publish a new config map with
> the ToolBuilder-${NowEmpty} packages removed.


Ah, I mistakenly thought ToolBuilder was a single package. So except for making up new packages this sounds right. 

- Bert -