[squeak-dev] Re: Breaking up ToolBuilder

David T. Lewis lewis at mail.msen.com
Wed Feb 17 01:13:01 UTC 2016

I am confused. Why is this a problem?

Right now we have these different packages:


This is quite reasonably modular, and it works fine. If I want to
unload the MVC framework, it is perfectly clear that Toolbuilder-MVC
should be unloaded, and the rest of Toolbuilder-* should be left alone.

Maybe I am missing something here, but I do not see any problem that
needs to be fixed. I am also reminded of various attempts to modularize
the system based on dependency analysis ... that result in less
modularity and a less understandable system.

So before we "fix" this could someone please explain why it is broken?


On Tue, Feb 16, 2016 at 04:32:21AM -0800, marcel.taeumel wrote:
> Hi, there.
> I know this discussion is about 3 years old. I just stumbled upon this
> dependency discussion.
> But what about
> "ToolBuilder-Morphic" -> "Morphic-ToolBuilder" or "MorphicToolBuilder"
> "ToolBuilder-MVC" -> "ST80-ToolBuilder" or "ST80ToolBuilder"
> ?
> Right now we have 4 tool builder packages in trunk: "ToolBuilder-Kernel",
> "ToolBuilder-MVC", "ToolBuilder-SUnit", "ToolBuilder-Tests". Then, it is
> always kind of dangerous to have packages with a dash inside. Mixes up with
> system categories too easily. And the "prefix package" (i.e. "ToolBuilder")
> would commit everything again. We need to be careful.
> Better examples include: "CollectionsTests", "MorphicExtras",
> "VersionNumberTests", "KernelTests".
> Best,
> Marcel
> --
> View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Breaking-up-ToolBuilder-tp4689489p4877865.html
> Sent from the Squeak - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list