stephane ducasse wrote
stable: spec
<symbolicVersion: #stable> spec for: #'pharo1.4.x' version: '1.1'. spec for: #'pharo2.x' version: '1.0'.
Now the semantics of common in symbolic version versus in version is not clear to me. Should I transform spec for: #'common' do: [ into spec for: #'pharo2.x' do: [ and spec for: #'common' do: [ into spec for: #'pharo1.4.x' do: [ You've already used the symbolic versions to indicate the stability/status mapping from platform to MetaC version. Unless the packaged in spec for: #'common'... are specific to PharoX.Y.Z (e.g. Platform.pharo14), I would leave the #'common'. The package that works for 1.4 might also work for 1.3 and 1.2. We should confirm with Dale, but I'm pretty sure that a #'pharo1.4.x' block will override a #'common' block, so there wouldn't be any conflict... -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/About-common-semantics-tp4668980p4669011.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.