[Pharo-dev] Selecting a package in the Monticello browser

Mariano Martinez Peck marianopeck at gmail.com
Thu Nov 7 13:41:16 EST 2013


OK. We commited this:
https://pharo.fogbugz.com/f/cases/12064/Selecting-a-package-in-the-Monticello-browser

Now you are able to change the behavior, either from the settings browser
or either from right clicking on the right panel (repositories) in the
Monticello Browser (there is a checkbox).

Cheers,


On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 1:22 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck <marianopeck at gmail.com
> wrote:

>
>
>
> On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 1:12 PM, Camillo Bruni <camillobruni at gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> I do not like it either... but if there are more than one repository group
>> (like before 1 per package) we have to make sure the repositories are
>> unique
>> per URL, otherwise you end up with different repositories which look the
>> same
>> but for instance do not have the same credentials, which was the problem
>> we
>> had back then.
>>
>
> Cami,
>
> Say I have 2 different packages. Both have the PharoInbox and Pharo20 as
> repos.
> If I edit and add a password to the ones of the package1 and then I go to
> package2, the password is kept.
> And this is the case even for 2.0.
> So maybe you are saying a different scenario?
>
>
>>
>> I remember that whenever we added a SLICE the inbox repository got
>> duplicated
>> causing qutie a bit of confusion, since you had to re-enter your password
>> twice
>> or more...
>>
>>
>> On 2013-11-07, at 17:09, Mariano Martinez Peck <marianopeck at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > So we were discussing this here in the sprint. People say this is a
>> feature. To be this is a bug.
>> >
>> > The change is in
>> >
>> > repositoryGroup
>> >       ^ workingCopy
>> >               ifNil: [MCRepositoryGroup default]
>> >               ifNotNil: [workingCopy repositoryGroup]
>> >
>> > which right now it is as
>> >
>> > repositoryGroup
>> >       ^ MCRepositoryGroup default
>> >
>> > So we will probably put a setting for the moment because we cannot
>> agree.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 7:48 PM, Stéphane Ducasse <
>> stephane.ducasse at inria.fr> wrote:
>> > Ben
>> >
>> > this is good to share repositories :)
>> > I got burned so many times while integrating changes back in Squeak 3.9
>> that this is the first things I did for the scriptLoader.
>> > Now I do not see why when we select a package we should see the ones
>> that are not associated with the package.
>> >
>> > Stef
>> >
>> > On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:49 PM, Benjamin <
>> Benjamin.VanRyseghem.Pharo at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> The thing is you use to have one instance of the same MCRepository per
>> package.
>> >> By example, the Pharo repository was in fact #{packageNumber}
>> instances.
>> >>
>> >> So the change you make on one (by example, string your password) was
>> not reflected to the others.
>> >> And it seems that during the fix of this, this issue was introduced.
>> >>
>> >> (I think the easy solution taken was to have the same repositories for
>> everything).
>> >> It’s indeed kind of a paint o deal with, but a smaller one that it use
>> to be :)
>> >>
>> >> Definitely it’s a bug, not a feature :)
>> >> We should wait tip Guillermo’s answer since he was the one fixing this
>> painful behaviour (2 sprints ago)
>> >
>> > We can try to do something during the sprint thursday.
>> >
>> >
>> >> Ben
>> >>
>> >> On 03 Nov 2013, at 22:44, Tudor Girba <tudor at tudorgirba.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> I do not understand what the password has to do with showing only the
>> relevant repositories for a selected package. Could you explain?
>> >>>
>> >>> Doru
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>> On Nov 3, 2013, at 10:39 PM, Benjamin <
>> benjamin.vanryseghem.pharo at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> The idea was that repositories were shared among packages.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Otherwise, you have to type your password a billion times
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Ben
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 03 Nov 2013, at 21:49, Tudor Girba <tudor at tudorgirba.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>>> Indeed, I wanted to raise this issue as well. The Monticello
>> browser is a rather terrible interface, but at least the scoping of
>> repositories was useful. Is the change intentional, or is it a bug?
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Doru
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 9:46 PM, Alexandre Bergel <
>> alexandre.bergel at me.com> wrote:
>> >>>>> Hi!
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Before, when one selects a package (left list), then only the set
>> of relevant repositories are displayed (right list). This is now not the
>> case anymore. I think I have seen somewhere a MC package is not associated
>> to a repository anymore. What is the idea behind this? I find this rather
>> convenient...
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> Alexandre
>> >>>>> --
>> >>>>> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:
>> >>>>> Alexandre Bergel  http://www.bergel.eu
>> >>>>> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> --
>> >>>>> www.tudorgirba.com
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> "Every thing has its own flow"
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >>> www.tudorgirba.com
>> >>>
>> >>> "What is more important: To be happy, or to make happy?"
>> >>>
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Mariano
>> > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Mariano
> http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
>



-- 
Mariano
http://marianopeck.wordpress.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.pharo.org/pipermail/pharo-dev_lists.pharo.org/attachments/20131107/c232fb73/attachment-0002.html>


More information about the Pharo-dev mailing list