The wiki page cited above

RefactoringTools   http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/831

  has a link to

Metacello http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/6157

which has a paragraph. called 'Installation'.


On 5/10/18, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> wrote:
> ... 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 There are some SqueakMap entries but they are outdated.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
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
>