On Mar 19, 2011, at 2:18 PM, Stéphane Ducasse wrote:
On Mar 19, 2011, at 5:35 PM, Dale Henrichs wrote:
Stef,
I would say that trying to diverge from category-based packaging for MC1 would pretty much be a disaster. the big problem is not what happens within Pharo (which is a tough enough problem to solve), but what happens to other folks (Squeak or GemStone or even VW in this case) trying to use mcz files created in Pharo that no longer align with the class and method categories? It will not be pretty.
No this is not a problem, because we can save the package with the * notation and category even if we do not need that.
...........
Now what other system like gemstone could do is also to copy the pharo package implementation because these are two classes.
Stef, Over the long haul I would agree that migration to the newer model is a good idea and gemstone could install the code (when tool support becomes available in GemStone) and as long as there is a transition period where RPackage isn't _required_, then I think that things can work smoothly... Dale