[squeak-dev] The Inbox: Monticello-cmm.1550112371873461.mcz

Chris Muller ma.chris.m at gmail.com
Thu Feb 14 04:22:57 UTC 2019

HI Eliot,

> > On Feb 13, 2019, at 7:13 PM, Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > What are the two most-important properties we want from our
> > versionNumber?  Monotonicity and uniqueness.  The current scheme only
> > provides the former, this uses DateAndTime now utcMicroseconds to
> > provide the latter, too.  As a bonus it also happens to encode the
> > save timestamp into the VersionName, so available without having to
> > open the file.
> >
> > I admit it looks intimidating given what we're used to seeing, but
> > what of the added safety and utility?
> It is trumped by the illegibility.

Not as bad as it appears, since the high-order digits will be the same
between version #'s, plus, second-resolution should be sufficient, so
versions in a list would actually look like this:


Whilst still retaining all of the utility.  Maybe even a setting in
the tools could hide the high-order digits in the UI if we wanted...
We're already into 4 digits in our version #'s anyway so....

> When was the discussion around this change?

You're participating in it now.   :)

There was another change to earlier today that you may be interested
in asking that question about too, since it changed 19-year old
SequenceableCollection>>#= with a one-day old replacement and actually
went into trunk.  This one is in the Inbox.

> I’ve been out if things (apologies) but I find this change quite horrible.

I understand this initial gut reaction, but I hope you'll think and
sleep on it, and help think about the problem and some alternative
solutions you like better.  VersionName uniqueness is important for
the Monticello model.


More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list