[Pharo-project] [Fix of the day contest] 4/7/2012 with extras

Guillermo Polito guillermopolito at gmail.com
Wed Jul 4 15:38:30 EDT 2012


On Wed, Jul 4, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Marcus Denker <marcus.denker at inria.fr>wrote:

>
> On Jul 4, 2012, at 9:25 PM, Guillermo Polito wrote:
>
> > Hi!
> >
> > I've done a little fix today that allows monticello tests to run -green
> btw- :). http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=6273
> > So, I expect this will put us 11 tests closer to a green build.
> >
> >
> > This was a problem related with the monticello-mocks and monticellomocks
> packages.
> > There are problems still remaining, like, as giving an example:
> >
> > - MCMock is categorized Monticello-Mocks, but is in the Monticello
> RPackage...
> >
> > That happens with all the classes in the Monticello-Mocks category.  The
> root of the problem is that we have some strange objects installed as
> packages (PackageInfo registrations).  Have a look at the result of:
> >
>
> The problem is that the MC tests use a featuer of MC that nobody uses:
> subclasses of PackageInfo to be able to make packages out of code that
> is actually not following the convention.
>
> See MCMockPackageInfo
>
> it's pacakgeName is "MonticelloMocks", but the idea was originally to
> never save that package, I think.
>
>
Ha, this looked like a bug :).  Yeah, probably for a next action we should
package this things well and stop using that feature which messes with all
the tools?


>
> --
> Marcus Denker -- http://marcusdenker.de
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-dev_lists.pharo.org/attachments/20120704/d37c759d/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Pharo-dev mailing list