Hi Christoph,

On Sat, Sep 12, 2020 at 12:19 PM Thiede, Christoph <
Christoph.Thiede at student.hpi.uni-potsdam.de> wrote:

> Hi all,
>
>
> maybe I am missing some central Squeak tool, but I have never been
> happy with the current way to update all installed third-party packages in
> Squeak - because I don't know anyone. Please allow me to give you a short
> outline of the tool I would like to use for updating packages:
>
>
> There should be a simple button in the Squeak Menu, just below "Update
> image", named "Update packages", that enables you to install the latest
> versions of all installed packages for which a remote does exist.  In
> addition, if I made any change to a package, it should be possible to
> merge the updates into my working copy. In particular, this does not only
> include Squeaksource packages but also packages from GitHub, BitBucket,
> etc. Great packages such as Autocompletion, MethodWrappers, Vivide, or
> Squot (see below) that are all hosted on GitHub and can be installed using
> a Metacello script.
>
> So how much of this is reality and how much is fiction today?
> For packages installed from Squeaksource, I can open them in the
> Monticello Browser and load or merge the latest version. At least, this
> works, but we could need a button to do this for all available packages
> where a "default remote" is selected.
> But for packages managed via git, this is not possible at all! The
> Monticello Browser does not know their remote repositories that were used
> to install the packages originally. Without extra settings made per
> repository baseline, you cannot even re-load a package again via the
> install script, see also this open issue:
> https://github.com/Metacello/metacello/issues/513 Meanwhile, I have made
> a habit of cloning all interesting projects via Squot in order to update
> them, even if I do not plan to commit to them ...
>
> I believe there is also something like SqueakMap which has an "Update" and
> an "Upgrade" button, but this tool is only made for accessing the
> Squeaksource, is this correct? From what I can see, Squeaksource and
> SqueakMap have become less important compared to GitHub (the reasons
> might include better visibility/explorability of projects, a more efficient
> VCS, and features like issues/pull requests; but that's probably not the
> point here).
>
> What do you think? Am I the only one facing this issue? How would a
> roadmap for such a tool look like? Looking forward to your ideas! :-)
>

I've been wanting something like this for the VMMaker development system
too.  And for FFI.  Any system builder who uses Squeak as a base, who has
on-going development, could benefit from such a system.  And us making it
easy to develop is I think a great idea.  So keep going, This is an
excellent direction.

I would also extend the idea with being able to upgrade the VM and dlls
within it, but for now that should be on the back burner.  Getting
image-level support for update of non-trunk packages is the mosyt important
thing.  Thank you.

Best,
> Christoph
>

_,,,^..^,,,_
best, Eliot
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20200912/2be8a7c9/attachment.html>