Hi Chris,

here are some thoughts on this commit:

- Please refrain from committing unrelated changes that are easily to
separate. If you have troubles uploading the 1000K MCZ for the System
package twice, consider upgrading your ISP. :-) *scnr*
- That "patch.st" hack seems like an indication that there are several
situations where you cannot cope with the .image characteristics of the
Smalltalk system. Please think about a better solution because the .image
file should usually not be read-only. It impedes Smalltalk-style maintenance
of such an image. While there have been good reasons in the past for
treating the .image in the Etoys bundles as read-only and relying on project
import/explort, I do not agree that we should make such a specific case
common practice. This "patch.st" feels like a first step towards yet another
CI/build system, which we already have with smalltalkCI and TravisCI.
- This commit message would benefit from a little more explanation. There is
plenty "what you did" but too little "why you did it". For example, the
words "... to be re-patched in the event of a restart" really need an
explanation of why you cannot just supply a start-up script to do that
patching like "./vm some.image patch.st". Please invest more time in more
elaborate commit messages.

:)

Best,
Marcel



--
View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/The-Trunk-System-cmm-913-mcz-tp4913525p4913539.html
Sent from the Squeak - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.