You can have a look at dale henrichs web page
http://gemstonesoup.wordpress.com/2009/08/25/metacello-package-management-fo...
you can also have a look at Moose, mondrian .... on squeaksource. They are managed with metacello and we stress it :)
Stef
My first look at metacello to appraise it. It looks like a copy of Sake/Packages. S/P stores package definitions in methods of a class, so does Metacello. Metacello doesnt layer the dependency mechanism so that it can be used for other things. Sake/Packages is layered on top of Sake. Metacellos appears declarative and only declarative, whereas S/P can execute arbitrary tasks or code. Metacello's metadata fields appear fixed S/P's is not. As far as I can see S/P had most of the functionality of Metacello, a year before and it supports unloading. I am not saying that S/P is perfect, it is not as "controlled" and constrained as the Metacellos approach. There are small improvements that S/P could add to make it equivalent. For example each package definintion loads a single package in S/P in Metacello a single package definition can load multiple packages which makes for a more concise library. It would be a trivial change to include. enjoy Keith