... and... how to get Metacello please?


On Thu, May 10, 2018 at 6:29 AM, Tobias Pape <Das.Linux at gmx.de> wrote:
> Hi
>
>> On 10.05.2018, at 09:19, H. Hirzel <hannes.hirzel at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hello
>>
>> Following up on this thread.
>>
>> Where do I get the latest version of the RefactoringTools updated for
>> the most recent trunk version?
>>
>> There are some SqueakMap entries but they are outdated.
>>
>> This
>>
>>     http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/831
>>
>> seems to give recent information as well.
>
> This is the most recent info.
>
> I short, if you have Metacello,
>
>         Metacello new
>                 configuration: 'RefactoringTools';
>                 load.
>
>
> That's about it.
> Marcel and Me will keep the Config up to date.
> We have not made any SqueakMap entries.
>
> Best regards
>         -Tobias
>
>
>
>>
>> --Hannes
>>
>> On 11/3/17, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Jacob,
>>>
>>> On Thu, Nov 2, 2017 at 12:30 PM, Jakob Reschke <forums.jakob at resfarm.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Am 02.11.2017 7:11 nachm. schrieb "Eliot Miranda"
>>>> <eliot.miranda at gmail.com
>>>>> :
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 3:15 AM, Marcel Taeumel <marcel.taeumel at hpi.de>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Next step would be to build a preview tool that supports add/remove
>>>>> steps
>>>>> of a refactoring. For example, a "rename message" might tackle too much
>>>>> methods. That is, there is no scoping at the moment.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> OK.  We likely definitely want to scope by package(s), right?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Unless you wanted to say "packages, not classes or categories" I do not
>>>> think so. Mostly because projects/software is often divided into -Core
>>>> and
>>>> -Tests packages. Or think of -Examples, -Plugins, -Extensions... So I
>>>> fear
>>>> explicit input of the scope (a set of packages) will be required.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I think offering two scopes is adequate:
>>> a) the entire system
>>> b) classes and extension methods whose package name matches either a prefix
>>> or a pattern
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> Using package dependencies (like in ENVY) would be nice, but they are
>>>> unmaintained in Monticello (often only supplied with Metacello).
>>>>
>>>> Oh, and my Environments bell is ringing again... ;-)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Remember that one can always generate more narrowly scoped refactoring by
>>> 1. performing the refactoring on some larger scope (e.g. the entire system)
>>> 2. quitting the system
>>> 3. using the changes crash recovery tool to select the desired refactorings
>>> or by using method versions to revert any unwanted
>>>
>>> So having a simple generally useful scope such as package or package prefix
>>> would work for me.
>>>
>>> _,,,^..^,,,_
>>> best, Eliot
>>>
>>
>
>